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.

[ 10] THE SEVENTH BOOKE, Concerning the last Romish Consequence, derived from the depraved sense of the words of Christ, [THIS IS MY BODY;] which is your Divine Adora∣tion of the Sacrament; contrary to these other [ 20] words of Christ, [IN REMEM∣BRANCE OF MEE.]

CHAP. I.

WEe have hitherto passed thorow many dan∣gerous and pernicious Gulfes of Romish Doctrines, which our instant haste will not suffer us to looke backe upon, by any re∣petition [ 30] of them. But now are wee en∣tring upon Asphaltites, or Mare mortuum, even the Dead Sea of Romish Idolatrie; whereinto all their Superstitious and Sa∣crilegious Doctrines do empty themselves: which, how dete∣stable it is, wee had rather prove, than prejudge.

The State of the Question, concerning Adoration of the Sacrament [ 40] SECT. I.

IN the thirteenth Session of your Councell of Trent, wee finde a Decree commanding thus,a 1.1 Let the same divine honour, that is due to the true God, be given to this Sacrament. After this warning Piece, they shoot off a greatb 1.2 Canon of Anathe∣mae, and Curse against every one that shall not herein worship Christ (namely, as corporally present) with Divine honour.

That is to say,c 1.3 To adore with an absolute divine worship the whole visible Sacrament of Christ, in the formes of Bread and Wine, as your Iesuit expoundeth it; A worship (saith hee) farre exceeding that, which is to be given to the Crucifix. Whereupon it is that your Priests are taught, in yourd 1.4 Romane Missall, to elevate the Consecrated Hoast, and to propound it to the people to be adored; and adoring it themselves, in thrice striking their breast, to say, O Lambe of God, that takest away the sinnes of the world, have mercie upon us. {fleur-de-lys} Besides your other Precations, as thus:1 1.5 I, in a Catholike faith, being prostrate before thee [ 10] (Lord Iesus) adore thee God, whom I believe to be corporally present under the formes of Bread and Wine. {fleur-de-lys} So you.

But what do they, whom you call Sacramentaries, judge of this kinde of worship, can you tell?e 1.6 All of them (saith your Cardinall) call it Idolatrie. But they, whom you call Lutherans, are they not of the same Iudgement? say,f 1.7 They call us (because of this worship) Artolaters, that is, Bread-wor∣shippers and Idolaters, saith your Iesuite. As for our Church of England, Shee accordingly saith, that The Sacrament of the Lords Supper was not reserved, carryed about, lifted up, or wor∣shipped. [ 20]

Our Method must now be to treat first of Christs Institution, or Masse; next of the Profession of Ancient Fathers; then of your Romish Masse in it selfe; and lastly wee shall returne againe to our owne home, to demonstrate the happy Security, which our Church hath in her maner of worship. So that these contradictory Propositions, This Sacrament is to be adored with divine worship, and, Is not to be adored with divine worship, being the two different scales of this Controversie, the one will pre∣ponderate [ 30] the other, according to the weight of Arguments, which shall be put into either of them.

Of the Institution of Christ; shewing that there was therein [ 40] neither Precept for this Adoration of the Sacra∣ment, nor Practice thereof. SECT. II.

NO outward Adoration of the Sacrament was practised of the Disciples of Christ (say wee) at the Institution there∣of, which you confesse with us; and take upon you to give a

reason thereof, to wit, thatg 1.8 There was no need that the Apostles should use any outward signification of honour to the Sa∣crament, because they had then Christ present and visible before them So your Iesuite, which contradicteth your owne Ob∣jection, of therefore adoring Christ in receiving the Sacra∣ment, because then hee* 1.9 Cometh under the roofe of your mouths; for the neerer our approach is to any Majesty, the greater useth to be our outward humiliation. But well; no Practice of out∣ward Adoration by the Apostles at that time can appeare, much [ 10] lesse have you any Evidence of any Precept for it. If there had beene in the words of Christ, or in the volume of the New Testament any syllable thereof, your Cardinall would not have roaved so farre as to Deuteronomie, in the Old Testament, to fetch his onely defence out of these words of God,h 1.10 Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God; (supposing that the Bread which is worshipped is indeed the Sonne of God:) which is, as it were, mere Canting being the basest kinde of Reasoning that can be, and is therefore called of Logicians, A begging of the point in Question.

[ 20] Wee contrarily adhere to the Institution of Christ in all points necessary, and essentiall thereunto, and knowing that the A∣postle promised to deliver* 1.11 Whatsoever hee had received of the Lord, concerning this Sacrament (which you hold to be the principall part of your Romish Religion) wee are perswaded that h••e in expressing the other Commands of Christ, touching Consecration, Administration, and Communication of this Sacra∣ment, never taught that your Article of divine Adoration, whereof hee gave not so much as the least intimation. The A∣postolicall times faile you. Wee shall try if the next, called the [ 30] Primitive Age, can any whit advantage your Cause, which is our second Station.

CHAP. II.

Of the Doctrine of Antiquity, concerning the A∣doration of the Eucharist. [ 40] SECT. I.

THe Iudgement of Antiquity is objected by you, and the same is opposed by us against you. Let both be put to the Triall; First, by answering of your Objections out of the Fathers against us: and then by opposing their direct Testimo∣nies against you. Your Objections are partly

Verball, and partly Practicall; the Verball are of three kinds, two whereof are specified in the next Proposition.

That neither the objected maner of Invitation to come with Feare, nor of Association of Angels, spoken of by the Fa∣thers, imply any Divine Adoration of the Eucharist. SECT. II. [ 10]

OVt ofa 1.12 Chrysostome is objected his Exhortation, that Christians in their approach to this Sacrament, Do come with horror, feare, and reverence. Next, is their talking of the Angels, being present at this Celebration, holding downe their heads, and not daring to behold the excellencie of the splendor, &c. and to deprecate the Lambe lying on the Altar. These seeme to your Cardinall to be such invincible Testimonies, to prove the Adoration of Christ as Corporally present, that hee is bold to say, They never hitherto were answered, nor yet possibly can be. So he; [ 20] taking all Chrysostomes words in a literall sense; whom notwith∣standing your owne* 1.13 Senensis hath made to be the most Hyper∣bolizing Preacher of all the Fathers: and therefore hath given unto all Divines a speciall Caution against his Rhetorick, in the point of this Sacrament, lest wee understand him literally. Of which kinds you may have some Instances out of the very pla∣ces objected, whereb 1.14 Chrysostome saith indeed, That wee see that Lambe lying on the Altar. And said hee not also, even in the same Oration, Wee see here Christ lying in the Manger, wrapped in his clouts; a dreadfull and admirable spectacle? So hee. But [ 30] (say) do you see herein either Cratch or Clothes? or can you talke of Christ's lying on this Altar, who teach, that as hee is in this Sacrament, hee hath no locall Site, Posture, or Position at all? It is also true of the Angels, hee said [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] they stand in dread, and the sight is fearefull. And hee saith no lesse of the Festivall day of Christ's Nativity, that It is most venerable, and terrible, and the very Metropolis of all others. Yet doth not this argue any Corporall Presence of Christ, in respect of the day. This Answer, taken from Chrysostome, may satisfie for Chrysostome. [ 40]

Wee grant furthermore to yourc 1.15 Cardinall, That all the Greeke Fathers call the Eucharist terrible, and full of dread. But what? As therefore implying a Corporall presence of Christ, and Divine Adoration thereupon? This is your Cardinals scope; but to prove him an ill marke-man, take unto you an answer from your selves,* 1.16 who teach with the Apostle, that All pro∣phane comers to this Sacrament make themselves guilty of the Body and Blood of Christ; in which respect wee do acknowledge

it to be Dreadfull indeed, especially to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 yet ma∣king no more for a Corporall presence, than the contempt of Bap∣tisme, whereby a man maketh himselfe obnoxious to Gods judgements, (as* 1.17 Augustine hath compared them) can 〈◊〉〈◊〉 same. Another answer you may receive from Ancient Fathers, who, together with the Eucharist, have* 1.18 called the reading of Scriptures Terrible; and so were the Canons of Baptisme called Terrible, even by* 1.19 Chrysostome himselfe.

As for your objected assistance of Angels, at the Celebration [ 10] of the Eucharist, it is no such a Prerogative, but that the Prayers of the Faithfull, and Baptisme will plead for the same honour: your Durandus granting of the first, thatd 1.20 The Angels of God are present with us in our Prayers; and for the second, Divine Nazianzen teacheth thate 1.21 The Angels are present at Baptisme, and do magnifie (or honour) it with their presence, and observance: notwithstanding none of you ever defended either Corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament of Baptisme, or yet any Adoration of the consecrated Element of Water therein. If these two may not serve take unto you this Saying of Augu∣stine, [ 20] spoken of persons baptized,f 1.22 They (saith hee) with feare are brought unto Christ their Physician, that is (for so hee expoundeth himselfe) unto the Sacrament of eternall Salvation. Which one Saying of so Orthodox a Father doth instru•• us how to interpret all your objected Testimonies; to wit, that Whosoever come to the receiving of the Sacrament of Christ, they ought to come with feare, as if they were in the presence of Christ. And thus is your unanswerable Objection answered, so that this your Cable rope being untwisted is become no bet∣ter [ 30] than loose towe. Now to your third Objection.

That the most earnestly-objected Phrase [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] and Adora∣tion, used of the Fathers, doth not necessarily inferre any Divine Worship of the Eucharist. SECT. III.

WEe find not your Disputers more pressing and urgent in any Argument, than in objecting the word, Reverence, Honour, and especially Adoration, for proofe that Divine Ho∣nour [ 40] is due to the Eucharist, as to Christ himselfe, whensoever they finde the use of that Phrase applyed by Antiquity unto this Sacrament. Our answer is first in generall; That the words Reverence, Honour, and Adoration, simply in themselves, with∣out the Adjunct and Additament, Divine, cannot conclude the Divine worship proper to God. To this purpose wee desire you not to hearken unto us, but to heare your selves speake.a 1.23 The Pontificall Vestments, Chalices (and the like) are to be honoured,

say you, but how? with divine honour? you will nor say it; nor will you hold our ancient Bede worthy of Divine worship, albeit you entitle him Venerable, in a Religious respect. Yea (under the degree of Divine worship) wee our selves yield as much to the Eucharist, asb 1.24 Augustine did to Baptisme, when hee said, Wee reverence Baptisme wheresoever.

Accordingly of the word, Adoration, your Cardinall and o∣ther Iesuites are bold to say, thatc 1.25 It is sometimes used al∣so in Scriptures for an honour common to Creatures, as to An∣gels, to Kings, to Martyrs, and to their Tombes. And although [ 10] your Disputers should conceale this Truth, yet would the Fa∣thers themselves informe us in what a Latitude they used the same word, Adoration. Among the Latine Fathers, one, who knew the propriety of that Language as well as any, viz. Ter∣tullian, saying,d 1.26 I adore the plenitude of Scriptures; and Gre∣gory Nazianzene, among the Greeke, for his excellencie in di∣vine knowledge,e 1.27 sirnamed the Divine (and therefore may not be thought to apply words belonging to Divine worship pre∣posterously or improperly) instructed the party baptized to say thus to the Devill, Fall downe [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] and worship [ 20] mee. Thus much in Generall.

Let us proceed, You to your particular Objections, and Wee to our Answers. I. Ob. Ambrose saith, thatf 1.28 Wee adore in these mysteries the flesh of Christ, as the footstoole of his Deity. You call this an Argument infallible: nay (say wee) but false, because Ambrose doth not say, that wee adore the Sacra∣ment, (which is the point in Question) but that in our mysticall Celebration of the memory of Christ his Passion, wee are to adore his Humanity, namely as it is hypostatically united to the person of his God-head, which all Christians professe as well [ 30] as you, yea even in Baptisme also. II. Ob.g 1.29 None (saith Augustine) doth eat the flesh of Christ before hee adore it. A Te∣stimony which seemeth to you Notable: but which wee judge to be indeed not able at all to prove the Divine Adoration of the Sacrament, even in the Iudgement of Saint Augustine, who hath every-where distinguished betweene the Sacrament and Christs Flesh, as betweene Bread and Christs Body, as hath beene of∣ten demonstrated. His meaning therefore is no more but this, that whosoever shall communicate of this Sacrament, the Symboll of Christ must first be a true Christian, believing [ 40] that Christ is not onely man, but God also, and adore him ac∣cordingly with Divine honour, as well before and without the

Sacrament, as at the receiving thereof. Even ash 1.30 〈…〉〈…〉, speaking of Baptisme, saith that The Catechumenists do adore the Father and the Sonne, but they are not perfect before they are bap∣tized in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the Ho∣ly Ghost. So Athanasius. Consider the words well, the Cate∣chumenists are said not to be perfect, before they are baptized in the name of the Father, Sonne, and Holy Ghost, whom they adore. Therfore did they first adore the Persons, in whose names they were baptized: except some will feigne a Christian Catechu∣menist [ 10] to be admitted to holy Baptisme before hee believe and professe that hee believeth; which is the Adoration of the Blessed Trinity. And is there any of your Priests so unchri∣stian, as not to adore Christ, before hee come to the Commu∣nion? A plaine Case.

{fleur-de-lys} Notwithstanding, were it that the Adoration, above objected out of Saint Augustine, should referre to the time of the Celebration of the Eucharist; yet will hee not admit of any other Veneration therein, then what may be held as well in the Sacrament of Baptisme; hee requring that in [ 20] both these the2 1.31 Veneration be not applyed to the Sacrament it selfe, but to the things signifyed thereby. Which Doctrine of Saint Augustine may serve for an 〈◊〉〈◊〉 as against all other Idolatrous infections, so against your Objection, taken from the false conceipts of Pagans; as if they had approved of the false Adoration used by Christians, thinking that they had adored the Sacrament, as they themselves* 1.32 adored Ce∣res and Bacchus. But those godly Christians (you know) did not adore the Bread and Wine: Therefore could not this be applyable to the matter in Controversie. {fleur-de-lys}

[ 30] Will you have any more? The places alleged out of Saint Augustine, by you, are like Bellerophons Letters, to confute you; for lest Saint Augustines Reader might mis-construe the mea∣ning of Christs words, by perverting them to a Corporall and Orall eating of his Flesh,a 1.33 Saint Augustine addeth (bringing Christ speaking to the Iewes, concerning the eating of his ••lesh) You are not to eat this flesh, which you see: hee saith not, You are not to see the flesh which you shall eat, (which is your Romish Iugling:) But thus, You are not to eat the flesh which you see, namely that, which then was visible when Christ was in the [ 40] world. This one Testimonie of Augustine may satisfie for the present, untill another shall be delivered from him absolutely * 1.34 confuting your Tridentine Faith of the Divine worship of the Host, to prove it Idolatrous.

{fleur-de-lys} II. Ob. Ambrose furthermore requireth, that the Communicant come with Feare, and a minde knowing that 3 1.35

hee oweth reverence to him, whose Body hee commeth to receive. Which words your Doctor calleth Plaine termes. Sol. And so indeed they are, for proofe of an Adoration to Christ, who is spiritually received in our receiving this Sacrament: ••ut not to the Sacrament it selfe, as unto the very person of Christ. Yea, and the same Reverence wee also professe to be likewise due unto Christ, even in the hearing of his holy word. {fleur-de-lys}

III. Ob. Theodoret seemeth unto you to come off roundly, saying thatb 1.36 Symbols and Signes are believed and adored, whereby hee most evidently teacheth the presence of Christ's flesh [ 10] (as saith your Cardinall:) even so, as commonly hee useth to do in alleging of other Testimonies, both unconscionably against his knowledge, and unluckily against his Cause. For with what Conscience can hee urge the word Adoration here, as most evi∣dently noting a Divine worship of the Sacrament, seeing that hee hath before confessed the same word, Adore, to be used of the Fa∣thers, sometimes for worship communicable to Angels, & Saints, and to their Tombes? yea, and when as also Theodoret (which proveth your Cardinals Objection lucklesse) doth expresly say, that The substance of Bread remaineth, meaning absolutely the [ 20] proper substance of Bread (as hath beene* 1.37 copiously proved) whereunto no Divine worship can be lawfully given, not onely in the Faith of all other Catholike Fathers; but even in the be∣liefe of the Romane Church at this day? And although the Symbols, and Signes (as you fancie) were meere Accidents, yet dare not you your selves say that they are to be properly adored with Divine Worship.

Hitherto have we insisted upon the words objected out of the Fathers, by you, with more eagernesse, than either with good [ 30] Iudgement or Conscience. Your next Objections are taken from their Acts, whereunto wee ad∣dresse our Answers.

[ 40]

CHAP. III.

That no objected Act out of the Fathers, for proofe of an Invocation by Divine Adoration of the Eucharist, is conscionably alleged; not the first, which is their pre∣scribed Concealment of this Mysterie. [ 10] SECT. I.

ACts insisted upon by you, for proofe of Adoration; are these; The Fathers injoyning a Concealment of this Mysterie from some others: their Elevation of the Host after Consecration: their Cautelousnesse in administring it, without letting any part thereof fall to the ground: their Bodily Gesture in token of Humiliation; and their pretended Invocating on it. Wee acknowledge (that wee [ 20] may begin with the first) how strictly often times the Ancient Fathers generally prescribed to others, (which they observed themselves) that this Mysterie should be kept secret from all per∣sons, who were not initiated by Baptisme, and incorporated ther∣by into the visible Church of Christ, were they Infidels or Ca∣techumenists (that is) unbaptized Christians. Vpon this our Confession, as the Base, hearken what a discant your Doctors can chant, saying as followeth;a 1.38 The Fathers said of this my∣sterie of the Eucharist that onely [Fideles nôrunt] the Faithfull know it: and therefore wee must be perswaded they understood [ 30] a Corporall Presence of Christ herein; and consequently a Divine Adoration due unto it. Master Brerely swelleth big, in amplify∣ing this Objection; take a brief of the whole. The Fathers profes∣sing to write more circumspectly of this Sacrament, so as not daring to explaine it, as Theodoret, Origen, Augustine, Chrysostome; this were causlesse, if the Fathers had thought Christ's words figurative: nor had it beene more necessary in this than in Baptisme, had the Fa∣thers acknowledged no other presence in this, than in Baptisme, &c. So hee; and so also your Irish1 1.39 Iesuite.

Well then, by your owne judgement, if it may be found that [ 40] the Eathers observed a like Circumspection in the maner of utte∣ring, and Cautelousnesse in concealing the Sacrament of Baptisme from Infidels and Catechumenists; then must you confesse that this your Argument maketh no more for proofe of a Corporall Presence in the Eucharist, as you would have it, than in Baptisme, where you confesse it is no. And now behold the Fathers are as precise in concealing the Mysterie of Baptisme, from all persons unbaptized, even in as expresse termes as was spoken of in the

Eucharist; Chrysostome saying, (against such Persons)b 1.40 The faithfull know this. And againe, entring into a discourse of Bap∣tisme, he prefaceth saying;c 1.41 I would indeed speake this plainly, but I dare not, because of them that are not initiated, or Baptized.

{fleur-de-lys} Basil also, speaking of the Rites of Baptisme, saith that 2 1.42 The Ancient Fathers (before his time) left them in silence; and preserved them from curious and idle men. {fleur-de-lys} And Diony∣sius, the supposed Areopagite,d 1.43 Let none that is not a perfect Christian be admitted to the sight of the signes of Baptisme: even as the Councelle 1.44 Arausicanum also decreed. Which Cautions [ 10] are long since antiquated by disuse in Churches Christian, be∣cause all are now baptized that come to behold this Sacrament. If hereupon any Protestant shall inferre a Corporall Presence of Christ in Baptisme, and consequently an Adoration of Christ in the same Sacrament, you your selves (wee know) would but hisse at him, in detestation of his Consequence, as judging it Idolatrous.

But do you aske, why then the Fathers did teach Christians not to speake of these Mysteries in the hearing of the Catechume∣nists? Saint Augustine himselfe (whom your Cardinall hath [ 20] brought in for defence of Corporall Presence) will resolve us, and witnesse against him, telling him, not that the reason was the sub∣limity of the matter, as though they could not apprehend it, but becausef 1.45 The more honourably the Sacraments are concealed (spea∣king in generall) the more ardently they would be coveted and desi∣red. As for their not revealing them unto Infidels, the reason is evident; Infidelity is a mocker, and they meant to preserve Christs Sacrament from contempt. Thus your most specious Objection serveth for nothing more than to prove your Disputers to be wonderfully precipitant in their Arguing. [ 30]

That the objected Elevation, or lifting up of the Hoast, and preserving of it from falling, are no Arguments of Divine Adoration. SECT. II. [ 40]

SEcondly, the Elevation of the Hoast over the head of the Priest is your ordinary Objection, for proofe of a Divine Adoration; although you have* 1.46 confessed, that this was not of prime Anti∣quity. But supposing Elevation to have been so ancient, yet was it not to the end it should be adored, no more than was the Booke of the Gospel, in the Roman Church, when it was (according to

the Rite thena 1.47 Lift up by the hands of the Deacon, and carried on his right shoulder. What else will you say of the Priests elevation? you would perswade (in theb 1.48 Margin) by some, that the Priest lifting the Hoast over his head, was prophesied of by the Psal∣mist; And, that the Rite of holding the Hoast up was chiefly, that the people knowing it to be now consecrated, should understand that Christ is on the Altar, whom they are to adore by falling downe on the ground. Whereof albeit some of you speak more confident∣ly, yet the most principall searcher into Antiquity dare say no more, than onely This is probable.

[ 10] Wee contrarily conceive, 1. that that Rabbinish interpretation can be no good ground to rest upon, which* 1.49 hath bin rejected by Bellarmine, as being idle and frivolous. 2. That the Ceremony of Elevation (as hath* 1.50 beene confessed) was neither instituted by Christ, nor yet alwaies in use in Christ's Church. 3. That the same Elevation, albeit used after Consecration, doth not so much as Pro∣bably prove it was for Adoration-sake, because it was aswell in use in your lifting up of the Hoast before Consecration; as your ob∣jected c 1.51 Missals of Saint Iames, and Basil do manifest. Lastly, [ 20] that where Elevation was practised after Consecration, the obje∣cted Authors confute your Assertion, for in Chrysostome (if wee should grant unto you the whole Liturgie to be his, which the best learned Grecians at this day do* 1.52 deny) it is read,d 1.53 That the Priest did take a portion out of the dish, and held it up but a little: this is not lifting it over the head, or very high, as your reason for Adoration would require. And in your objected S.e 1.54 Denis there is no more, but that The sacred celebrated Symbols were brought into light, which after Consecration hee termeth Vn∣covered Bread, divided of the Priest into many parts. Bread (wee say) broken after Consecration; which is the break-necke of your whole Defence.

[ 30] {fleur-de-lys} And why may not wee thinke the Elevation, for Adora∣tion of the Host, to be an after-Invention, aswell as was the Ele∣vation of the Chalice for the same end? whereof it is confessed by your owne Ritualist, that3 1.55 The elevation of the Chalice, that the people might adore it, was not commanded untill after the daies of Thomas Aquinas. So hee; and that (you know) was a thousand and some hundreth of yeares after Christ his Institution of this Sacrament. It were strange, if the Romish

Faith had then been, that the Blood of Christ, beeing Corpo∣rally in the Sacrament, and Consequently adored of the peo∣ple, that the Primitive Church should not have used an Eleva∣tion of the Cup, for better Accommodation-sake, aswell as your new Romish Church hath ordained so many Ages since. Not to tell you of the Church under Prester-Iohn, which (as is4 1.56 confessed) used no Elevation. {fleur-de-lys}

Your third Objection is the diligent Caution given by Ancient Fathers, to take heedf 1.57 Lest that any Crum should fall to the ground, and if any little part thereof should fall, it should be left to [ 10] the Priest, and the Remainder of the Sacrament after the Masse (say you) should be burnt to ashes, and the ashes laid up. So you. Pha∣raoh his Butler and Baker, we are sure, would have been loath to miscarry in spilling, or letting fall any part of their carriage, when they were to present their service unto their King; much more carefully ought every Christian, in executing his sacred Function, to observe the Lawes of Decorum. Marke we, by the way, Master Brerely durst not call the part falling any thing but a Part, not A part of Christ's Body, that were Impious, not a part of Accidents, that were absurd: what meaneth the childish Fa∣bling [ 20] trow wee, but that if they should speake out, they should betray their Cause, in calling that little part a part of Bread, as your objected Dionysius spake? And when all is said, wee heare no proofe of Divine Adoration of the Host. But we leave you to take your Answer from your Salmeron, who hath told you that * 1.58 Casuall spilling of the Cup is no sinne.

{fleur-de-lys} Howbeit, wee aske you, whether it were a Veniall sin in your Cardinall, to allege the words of Tertullian, as spoken of the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist, which, by the judge∣ment of your owne5 1.59 Authors were spoken of Common and [ 30] ordinary Bread and Wine? It were well that this kind of over∣sight both in Cardinall Bellarmine and Master Brerely were not in them a fault Common and ordinarie. Howsoever wee could tell you, that if the hazard were so great, as your Ob∣jections imply, namely, that any subject matter of Adoration had been believed to be in it, than was the holy Bishop Exu∣perius (whom notwithstanding Saint Hierome commendeth) much blameable for6 1.60 Carrying it in a Glasse. And much more condemnable should that godly Pope Zephyrinus have beene7 1.61 Who ordained that the Masse should be celebrated in [ 40] Chalices of Glasse; which the more brittle they were, the more solidly they confirme unto us this Truth, that Antiquity har∣boured not your beliefe of a Corporall Presence of Christ in this Sacrament. {fleur-de-lys}

Only we must againe insist in the former Observation, to wit, the frequent speeches of the Fathers, telling ••s of Crums, Frag∣ments, little parts of this Sacrament; and of Burning them into ashes, after the Celebration ended. Now answer us, in good sad∣nesse; was it ever heard of, we say not of ancient Fathers, but of any professing Christianity, were the Catholikes or Heretikes, who would not have judged it most execrible for any to say, or thinke that A crum, or little part of Christ's Body falleth? or that by a dash of the Cup, the Blood of our Lord is spilt or that the Pri∣mitive [ 10] Fathers, in the Remainder of the Sacrament, Burned their Saviour? Yet these must they both have thought, and said, if (as you speake of Eating, Swallowing, feeding Corporally on Christ's Body) the Body of Christ were the proper Subject of these acci∣dentall Events.

That the Objection taken from any Gesture, used in the daies of Antiquity, doth not prove a Divine Adoration of the Eucharist. [ 20] SECT. III.

GEsture is one of the points, which you object, as more ob∣servable than the former, but how? because Chrysostome will have the Communicant take it witha 1.62 Inclining his head downe before the holy Table. Cyril, byb 1.63 Bowing after the maner of A∣doring. You will be still like your selves, insisting upon H••tero∣genies, and Arguments which conclude not ad idem. For first, the Examples objected speake not of Bowing downe to the Sacrament, but of our Bowing downe our heads to the ground, in signification of our Vnworthinesse; which may be done in Adoring Christ [ 30] with a [Sursum corda] that is, Listing up our hearts to Christ above. And this may become every Christian to use, and may be done without Divine Adoration of the thing before us.

Nay, and that no Gesture, either Standing, Sitting, or Kneeling, is necessary for such an Adoration, your greatest. Advocate doth shew out of Antiquity, and affirmeth this as a Point (asc 1.64 he saith) agreed on by all; adding that Divine Adoration consisteth not in the outward Gesture, but in the Intention of the mind. For, indeed, there is no one kind of outward Gesture, which (as you have con∣fessed) [ 40] is not also communicable to man: so that although that were true, which is set down in that Rubrick of* 1.65 Chrysostomes Li∣turgie, that the Ministers did use to Incline their Bodies to the ho∣ly Table, yet none can be so simple to thinke that they did yield Divine honour unto the Table. Nay, your owne great Master of Ceremoniesd 1.66 Durantus hath observed the like Bewing downe

of the Priest in the preparation of this Sacrament, even Before Consecration; and one of your Iesuites witnesseth that the (ob∣jected) e 1.67 Greek Church at this day doth Reverently adore, before Consecration of the Bread and Wine, albeit Christ be not therein. And lest you may thinke your Posture of Kneeling to be abso∣lutely necessarie, wee referre you, for your ample satisfaction, to your owne learned French Bishop* 1.68 professedly discussing this Point.

This being knowne, how can you in any credibility conclude, as you have done, a Corporall presence of Christ in this Sacrament [ 10] after Consecration, from a Reverence which hath been yielded to the same Sacrament, before it was consecrated? In which consi∣deration your Disputers stand so much the more condemnable, because, whereas they shew some Examples of a Bodily Incli∣ning to the Sacrament, done before Consecration, yet after Conse∣cration they have not produced any one.

But what newes now? We blush, in your behalfe, to repeat the Instance which you have out of your Legends, of af 1.69 Brute Beast prostrating it selfe before the Host, and doing Reverence unto it. Wee would have concealed this, but that you seeme to glory [ 20] herein, as being for your Instruction, like to the reproofe given mira∣culously to Balaam by his Asse. Well might this Legend have be∣come that latter time of darknesse, wherein it was first hatched, but not these cleare daies, wherein your mysteries of Delusions have beene so often revealed, and when all Christians almost in all Countries have taken knowledge of an* 1.70 Horse taught by Art to kneele to any person at his Masters command; and once in France, when, by the Suggestion and Instigation of Romish Priests, his Master was called into question for Sorcerie, hee for [ 30] vindication of his credit with them, commanded his Horse to kneele before a Crucifix, and therby freed himselfe from suspition of Diabolicall familiarity, according to the Principles of their owne superstition. And for any one to conclude this to have bin Gods miraculous work in that Horse, (as the other was in that Asse) would seeme to be the reason of an unreasonable man; because all Miracles alwaies exceed all power both of Art, and Nature; else were they no Miracles at all. Thus to your fourth Objection from outward Acts, we passe on to Examples.

That no Example of Invocation, objected out of Antiquity, can [ 40] inferre the Divine Honour of the Sacrament, as is pretended. SECT. IV.

YOur Instances are Three; the principall in Gorgonia, the Si∣ster of Gregory Nazianzen, in whose Oration, at her Fune∣rall,

we find thata 1.71 She having been troubled with a prodigious dis∣ease, after that neither the Art of Physick, nor teares of her Parents, nor the publike Prayers of the Church could procure her any health, went and cast her selfe downe at the Altar, Invocating Christ, who is honoured on the Altar, saying that she would not remove her head from the Altar, untill shee had received her health: when (Oh admi∣able event!) she was presently freed from her d••sease. This is the Story set downe by Gregory Nazian••en. Hence your Cardinall concludeth, that Gorgonia invocated the Sacrament, as being the very Body and Blood of Christ, and calleth this An hot and [ 10] stinging Argument; and so indeed it may be named, yet onely in respect of them, whose consciences are scorched, or stung with their owne guiltinesse of in forcing and injuring the Story, as will now appeare.

For first, why should wee thinke that she invocated the Sacra∣ment? Because (saith yourb 1.72 Cardinall) she prostrated her selfe at the Altar, before the Sacrament; which words [Before the Sacra∣ment] are of his owne coyning, and no part of the Story. His next reason; Because she is said to have invocated him, who is hono∣red [ 20] on the Altar. As though every Christian praying at the Table of the Lord, to Christ, may not be justly said to Invocate him, who is used to be Honoured by the Priest, celebrating the memory of Christ thereon. Nay, and were it granted, that the Sacramentall Symbols had beene then on the Altar, yet would it not follow, that she invocated the Sacrament, as betokening a Corporall pre∣sence of Christ (as your Disputers have fancied) no more than if the said godly woman upon the same occasion presenting her selfe at the sacred Font, wherin she had beene baptized, could be thought to have invocated the water therein; because she was [ 30] said to have invocated him, who is honoured in the Administration of Baptisme. And furthermore it is certaine, that the Remainders of the Sacrament in those daies were kept in their Pastophorium, a* 1.73 place severed from the Altar, especially at this time of her being there, which was in the Night, as the Story speaketh.

O! but she was cured of her disease at the Altar. And so were other miraculous Cures wrought also at the Font of* 1.74 Baptisme. But, for a Conclusion, wee shal willingly admit of Gregory Nazi∣anzen to be Vmpier betweene us. He, in relating the Story, saith of the Sacrament of the Eucharist;9 1.75 If shee at the time [ 40] of her invocating had laid up any part of the Antitypes (or Sym∣bols) of the precious Body and Blood of Christ, that shee mingled with her teares. So hee, calling the consecrated Sacrament Antitypes, or Signes of Christ's Body: therby signifying, that the Sacrament is not the Body and Blood of Christ, as hath been* 1.76 pro∣ved unto you at large out of Nazianzen, and other Greeke Fa∣thers,

Whereas if indeed he had meant that the Body and Blood of Christ had beene there corporally present, as that which was Invocated; then now (if ever) it had concerned this holy Father to have expresly delivered his supposition thus, viz. If she had at that time of her Invocating laid up any whit of the precious Body and Blood of Christ. Wee say of the Body and Blood of Christ, and not (as hee said) of the Antitypes, or Signes of his Body and Blood. Thus is your hot and stinging Reason become chilly, cold, and altogether dronish.

Your second Instance is in Dionysius the Areopagite, who wri∣ting of the Sacramentc 1.77 said, O must divine Sacrament, reveale [ 10] union us the mysterie of thy signes, &c. which in the eares of your Disputers ringeth a flat Invocation of the Sacrament: {fleur-de-lys} And that10 1.78 Nothing could be said more plainly. {fleur-de-lys} Contrariwise wee confidently affirme, that your Teachers have taken a figure Prosopopoeia for Invocation; like men who take Moon-shine for Day-light, as wee shall manifest by Examples, Confessions, yea and the very Instance of Dionysius himselfe.

Prosopopoeia then is a figure, when one calleth upon that which hath no sense, as if it had sense; as when in Scripture the Pro∣phet [ 20] said, Heare ô Heavens, and hearken ô Earth, Isa. 1. In like maner, among the Ancient Fathers, one called upon his owne Church Anastasia, whence he was to depart, and saying thus, d 1.79 Oh Anastasia, which hast restored our Doctrine, when it was de∣spised! Others of the Element of Baptisme, thus: Oh water that hath washed our Saviour, and deserved to be a Sacrament! or thus, e 1.80 Oh water which once purged the world, yea (as another) and na∣ming itf 1.81 A Divine Lavacre, &c. Nay, you your selves can sing, & chant it to the Crosse,g 1.82 Oh Crosse our only hope, &c. and in expounding the same, allow no more than a Prosopopoeia and [ 30] figurative speech, lest that otherwise your Invocation may be judged Idolatrous. And wheras in another Romish Anthem it is sung of the Eucharist, Oh holy Feast! This Saying (saith ano∣ther h 1.83 Iesuite) agreeth to every Sacrament. Thus have you heard both from Fathers, and from your selves the like Tenour of In∣vocation; Oh Church! Oh Water! Oh Crosse! Oh Feast! nothing differing from Dionysius his Oh Divine Sacrament! yet each one without any proper Invocation at all.

And that you may further understand, that this Dionysius his OH! is as in voyce, so in sense the same which we judge it to be, [ 40] what better Interpreter can you require of this Greeke Author Dionysius, than was his Greeke Scholiast Pachymeres? who hath given his Iudgement of this very speech directly, saying that i 1.84 It was spoken as of a thing having life, and that fitly, as did Na∣zianzen, saith he; O great and holy Pascha, &c. And how should this be otherwise? seeing Dionysius, at the writing hereof, was not in any Church or place, where the Eucharist was celebrated,

but privately contemplating in his mind upon this holy Myste∣rie. The due consideration of these your former so frivolous, and so false Objections provoketh us to cry out, saying, Oh So∣phistry, Sophistry! when wilt thou cease to delude the soules of men? In which maner of speech, notwithstanding, wee do not Invocate, but rather detest, and abominate your Romish Sophi∣stry. And lest any of you should stumble upon the Attribute, which Dionysius giveth to the Eucharist, in calling it a Divine Sa∣crament, as if it should imply a Corporall Presence therein, reade [ 10] but one Chapter of the same Author, and hee will teach you to say as much of many other things, wherein you will not believe any Corporall Existence of Christ, we are sure: for there he equal∣ly nameth the place of Celebration,* 1.85 Divine Altar; the Sacra∣mental Signes, Divine Symbols; the Minister, Divine Priest; the Communicants, Divine People; yea and (which may muzzle eve∣ry Opponent) the matter of this Sacrament, Divine Bread.

In the third place is objected this saying of Basil; When the Bread is shewne, what holy Father hath left in writing the words of Invocation? Thus that Father, whence your Father Bellarmine [ 20] thus;k 1.86 Hence know we the Custome of the ancient Church, namely, that the Eucharist is shewne to the people after Consecration. And that Then (as we see now done among us) it was Invocated upon, even plainly after Consecration, saith your Durantus also, and indeed al∣most who not? But do you first, if you please, admire the wit of your Cardinall in so framing his Consequence, and after abhor his will to deceive you, when you have done: for he applieth the words, spoken by Basil of an Invocation before Cons••cration, (when as yet, by your owne Doctrine, Christ is not present) as spo∣ken of an Invocation of the Eucharist after Consecration; for [ 30] proofe of a Corporall Presence of Christ therein, and the Divine Adoration thereof, as will most evidently appeare. For first it is not unknown to you, that the Greeke Church differeth from your Roman in the forme of Consecration at this day, they consecrating in words of prayer, and Invocation, and you in the repetition of Christ's words [This is my Body] wherein there is* 1.87 no Invocati∣on at all. And Basil was of the Greeke Church. Secondly, your l 1.88 Archbishop of Caesarea, for proofe that Invocation by prayers was a forme of Consecration used primitively in the Greeke [ 40] Church, citeth the two most ancient Fathers, Tertullian and Irenaeus; and of the Greeke he allegeth Iustine, Cyril, Damas∣cen, Theophilus Alex. yea, and (by your leave) Basil himselfe too: and that Basil was an Orthodoxe Greeke Father you will not deny.

Thirdly, therfore (to come home unto you) wee shall be di∣rected by the Objected words of Basil himselfe, appealing here∣in to your owne consciences. For your Lindanus was, in the estimation of your Church, the strongest Champion in his time

for your Romane Cause; he, to prove that the forme of Conse∣cratio, of the Eucharist standeth not in any prescribed words in the Gospel, but in words of Invocation by prayer (as* 1.89 hath been confirmed by a Torrent of Ancient Fathers) saith,m 1.90 That the same is illustrated by these words of Basil, saying, What Fa∣ther hath left unto us i•• writing the words of Invocation, when the Bread is shewne unto us? adding, That no man of sound Braines can require any more, for the clearing of the point concerning••th forme of Consecration. So then, Invocation was an Invocation by Pray∣er unto God, for the Consecration of the Bread let before them, [ 10] and not an Invocation of Adoration unto the Eucharist, as alrea∣dy consecrated; which your Cardinal unconscionably (wee will not say, unlearnedly) hath enforced.

Looke upon the Text againe, for your better satisfaction; It speaketh expresly of an Invocation, when Bread is shewne: but you deny that Bread is Invocated upon, untill after Consecration. And Basils demanding [What Father before us hath left in writing the words of Invocation?] is, in true and genuine sense, as if hee had expresly said, what Father before us hath left in writing [ 20] the words of Invocating God by Prayer of Consecration of Bread, to make it a Sacrament? as both the Testimonies of Fathers above confessed manifest, and your objected Greeke Missals do ratifie unto us. For, in the Liturgie ascribed to Saintn 1.91 Iames the Apostle, the Consecration is by Invocating and praying thus, Holy Lord who dwellest in holiest &c. The Li∣turgie ofo 1.92 Chrys••stome Invocateth by praying; Wee beseech thee, O Lord, to send thy Spirit upon these Gifts prepared before us, &c. The Liturgie under the name ofp 1.93 Basil consecrateth by this Invocation, when the Priest lifteth up the Bread, Looke [ 30] downe, O Lord Iesu our God, from thy holy habitation, and vouch∣safe, &c. All these therefore were according to the Example of Christ) Invocations, that is, Prayers of Consecrating the Sacra∣ment; and therefore could not be Invocations of Adoration of the same Sacrament. {fleur-de-lys} Which Invocation, in Consecrating by Prayer,10 1.94 Cyril calleth an Invocation of the holy Tri∣nity. {fleur-de-lys} And as for any expresse or prescribed forme or pray∣er to be used of All, well might Basil say, Who hath set it downe in writing? that is, It was never delivered either in Scripture, or in the Bookes of any Author of former Antiquity; and this [ 40] is that which is testified in your owneq 1.95 Bookes of Augustine, out of Basil, saying that No writing hath delivered in what words the forme of Consecration was made.

Now then, guesse you what was in the braines of your Dis∣puters, in objecting this Testimony of Basil, contrary to the evident Sense; and accordingly judge of the weaknesse of your Cause, which hath no better supports than such fond, false, and ridiculous Objections to relye upon. Such as is al∣so

that yourr 1.96 Cardinall his objecting the words of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, concerning the receiving of this Sacrament, saying, Lord I am not worthy thou shouldest come under the roose of my mouth: which hath beene confuted, as unworthy the* 1.97 mention in this case.

If you would have some Examples of Adoring Christ with Divine worship, in the Mysterie of the Eucharist, by celebrating the maner of his death, (as Hierome may be said to have ado∣red at Ierusalem, Christ in his Cratch; or as every Christian doth [ 10] in the Mysterie of Baptisme) wee could store you with multi∣tudes: but of Adoring the Eucharist, with a proper Invocation of Christ himselfe, wee have not as yet received from you any one.

{fleur-de-lys} A Vindication of the Testimonies of Dionysius, Pachymeres, and Nazianzen, against the late vaine Calumni∣ations of a Romish Seducer. SECT. V.

[ 20]

IN the former Section was objected the Testimonie of Dionysius, saying of the Eucharist [ô Divine Sacrament!] as if it had beene spoken to the Sacrament, by invocating of it; and implying therein a Divine Adoration, because of that Corporall presence of Christ under the Formers of Bread and Wine. The Insufficiencie of this Consequence was mani∣fested (besides divers other Instances) by the Testimonie of Pachym••res your Greeke Expositour of Dionysius, referring us to Nazianzen his like words, when hee sayd [ô great and [ 30] holy Pascha.]

A late Romish Seducer (to omit his verball wranglings, which are now removed in this second Edition) falleth foule upon mee in an invective Conclusion, saying

[So wee see that Bellarmine, Dionysius, Pachymeres, and Nazianzen all agree: and that onely my Lord of Durham hath dealt inju∣riously with them all.]

So hee. Even so, as it became an egregious Seducer to say, as will now appeare. The par∣ties, which are said to be injured, are no lesse than fower; Bellarmine the Objector of Dionysius, Dionysius the Author [ 40] objected, Pachymeres the Expositor of the same Dionysius, referring us to the like Saying in Nazianzen, and lastly Na∣zianzen himselfe; unto whose sentence wee were so refer∣red. Whose words are these [ô great and holy Pascha:] which words, sayd I, were spoken to the Feast of Easter, and not to the Eucharist, and consequently not to Christ as Corpo∣rally present therein.

Nay (saith the Seducer) by [Pascha] was not meant the Feast of Easter, but the Eucharist, and

that by [ô great and holy Pascha] Nazianzen declareth his Invocation of Christ therein.

So hee. As soone then as wee shall understand the words of Nazianzen aright, wee shall easily discerne the Exposition of Pachymeres, and by him the meaning of Dionysius, and consequently the meere Sophistry (as I called it) of your Cardinall Bellarmine.

The words of Nazianzen, truly translated, are these; [But ô Pascha, the great and holy, the purification of the world, for I will speake unto thee as to that, which, as it were, hath Life.] The last words, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] will assoile the whole doubt, which [ 10] are spoken onely by way of a Metaphoricall Similitude, thus; [As to that, which, as it were, hath Life:] thereby implying, that it is in it selfe without Life, as both your Bil∣lius the Translator of Nazianzen, and Nicetas his Commen∣tator and Expositor; and lastly, Nazianzen himselfe will manifest. I. Billius (being hee whom the Romish Sedu∣cer himselfe hath attested, and whom wee now assume for our Proctor) translateth Nazianzen's words thus; [11 1.98 To enim quasi vitâ praeditum alloquar. For I will speake unto thee, even as having Life: or, to that, which, as it were, hath Life:] [ 20] Wee demand then, would any but an Anti-Christian say of Christ, that he is but a [Quasi] one who, as it were, hath Life? Secondly Nicetas, Metropolitane of Heraclea, is a professed and privileged Expositor of Nazianzen, him wee desire to be our Advocate in this Cause. [12 1.99 These words of Nazianzen [ô great Pascha, I say, ô sacred Pascha] Nazianzen (saith hee) referreth unto the Feast it selfe, as if it were indued with Life.] So hee. Do you not see how the words [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] that is [As it were having Life] compelled this learned Bi∣shop to expound the words of Nazianzen as meant properly [ 30] of [The Feast it selfe] called in Greeke and Latine Pascha, and by us Pace or Easter, and not to the Eucharist? which was that my Conclusion, against which the Romish Seducer hath revelled, and thereupon in a maner reviled me, to make me a Falsificator like himselfe.

Lastly Nazianzen is hee, whom wee reserve for our Pa∣tron in this Cause. The subject matter of the whole Oration of Nazianzen, now mentioned, is (as all know that have read it) the Celebration of the Great and holy Feast of Easter, of the which Feast, some few lines after his entrance into his [ 40] Oration, hee hath these words; [Pascha of the Lord, Pascha, and (in honour of the Trinity) I say the third time Pascha. This is the Feast of Feasts, and Celebrity of Celebrities;] expresly speaking not of Christ the Lord, nor of the Eucharist, but of that which hee calleth The Feast of Feasts: namely, that, which hee as expresly named The Pascha of the Lord: which words in the beginning of Nazianzen's Oration most harmo∣niously

accord unto his words now controverted in the end of the same Oration with Ecchoing as it were to the Former saith [ô great and holy Pascha] namely, in respect of the same Pascha, the Feast of Feasts, and Celebritie of Celebrities.

But this Romish Seducer, never considering these Premi∣ses, peremptorily posteth on, objecting onely the words of Nazianzen immediately following, which unto a Cursory Reader, might seeme to make, for him, some shew of Con∣futation; for thus hee proceeds: [ô word of God, and Light, and [ 10] Life, and Wisedome, and Power, for I am delighted with all thy names, &c.] Which words we confesse are spoken of Christ, and not of the Feast, whereupon your Seducer concludeth, that the former words [ô Pascha] refer likewise to Christ. Which his Erroneous conceipt hath beene long since confuted by the forenamed Bishop Nicetas, expresly affirming of these words that They were spoken of the* 1.100 Feast, and these last words [ô Word of God and Light, &c.] are spoken indeed to Christ the spirituall Pascha. But how? by Invocation? no: but by Ac∣clamation (saith hee) nothing being more Familiar to Ora∣tors, [ 20] than to use Apostrophe's, by Transition from the Signe to the Thing signified: as here, from the Signe, which was Christ's day of Resurrection, to the Contemplation of the person risen againe.

Notwithstanding, were it that this had beene an Invoca∣tion of Christ, yet except it had beene an Invocation of him, as hee was then in the Eucharist, it maketh nothing at all for Bellarmines Conclusion, which was thus, Ergò Christ is cor∣porally is this Sacrament, and to be Divinely adored therin.

By all which you may clearly discern the true meaning of [ 30] the first objected Author Dionysius from his Expositor Pa∣chymeres. II. The Iudgement of Pachymeres, by his Re∣ference to the Sentence of Gregory Nazianzen. III. The exact Vnderstanding of Gregory Nazianzen, by the Com∣mentarie of the Bishop Nicetas. And IV. the truth of that Commentarie by the Tenor of Nazianzen's Oration it selfe, as you have heard; and consequently that there is still just Cause for us to exclaime both against the So∣phistry of your Bellarmine, and rashnesse and impotencie, if not impudencie ra∣ther, [ 40] of this frivolous Seducer and Calumniator.{fleur-de-lys}

CHAP. IV.

That the Divine Adoration of the Sacrament is thrice Re∣pugnant to the Iudgement of Antiquity. First by their Silence. SECT. I. [ 10]

YOu are not to require of us, that wee produce the expresse Sentences of ancient Fathers, con∣demning the Ascribing of Divine honour to the Sacrament, seeing that this Romish Doctrine was neither in Opinion nor Practice in their times. It ought to satisfie you, that your owne most zealous, indefatigable, subtile, and skilfull Miners, dig∣ging and searching into all the Volumes of Antiquity, which [ 20] have beene extant in the Christian world for the space of sixe or seven hundred yeares after Christ, yet have not beene able to extract from them any proofe of a Divine honour, as due to this Sacrament, either in expresse words, or practice; insomuch that you are enforced to obtrude onely such Sentences, and Acts, which equally extend to the honouring of the Sacra∣ment of Baptisme, and other sacred things, whereunto (even according to your owne Romish Profession) Divine honour can∣not be attributed without grosse Idolatry: and neverthelesse have your Disputers not spared to call such their Objections [ 30] Cleare Arguments, piercing, and unsoluble.

Wee therfore make bold hereupon to knocke at the Consi∣story doore of the Conscience of every man, indued with any small glimpse of Reason, and to entreat him, for Christs sake, whose Cause it is, to judge betweene Rome and Vs, after hee hath heard the case, which standeth thus; Divine Adoration of the Host is held to be, in the Romish Profession, the principall practicke part of Christian Religion.

Next, the ancient Fathers of the Church were the faithfull Registers of Catholike Truth, in all necessary points of Chri∣stian [ 40] Faith, and Divine worship. They in their Writings ma∣nifoldly instructed their Readers by Exhortations, Admoniti∣ons, Perswasions, and Precepts how they are to demeane themselves in the receiving of this Sacrament; not omitting any Act, whereby to set forth the true Dignity, and Reverence belonging unto it; many of the same Holy Fathers sealing that their Christian profession with their Blood. It is now referred

to the Iudgement of every man, whether it can fall within his capacity to thinke it Credible, that those Fathers, if they had beene of the now Romish Faith, would not have expresly de∣livered, concerning the due Worship of this Sacrament, this one word consisting but of two syllables [viz. Divine] for directi∣on to all Posterity, to adore the Sacrament with Divine honour, even as it is taught in the Church of Rome at this day: and to have confirmed the same by some Practice, not of one or other private man or woman, but by their publike forme of Prayer, [ 10] and Invocation in their solemne Masses; or else to confesse, that Antiquity never fancied any Divine Adoration of the Eucharist.

Yet two words more. You presse the point of the Invoca∣tion of the Sacrament more urgently and vehemently than any other: and wee indeed believe that the ancient Fathers (if they had held, according to the now Romane Church, a Corporall presence of Christ) would never have celebrated any Masse, without an expresse Invocation of the Sacrament, as in your now-Romane Masse, wee finde it done, saying, O Lambe of [ 20] God, &c. or some other like forme. Yet know (now) that your owne learned Pamelius hath published two large Tomes of all the Masses in the Latine Church, from Pope Clemens downe to Pope Gregory (containing the compasse of six hundred yeares) wee say, Latine Missals above forty in number; in all which, upon our once reading, wee presume to say that there is not one such tenour of Invocation at all. This our first Reason, ta∣ken from so universall a silence of ancient Fathers, in a case of so necessary a moment, may be (wee thinke) satisfactory in it selfe to any man of ordinary Reason. Our second Objection [ 30] out of the Fathers followeth.

That the Ancient Fathers gain-sayd the Corporall presence of Christ in this Sacrament, and the Adoration therof, by their Preface, in their presenting the Host, saying, [Lift up your Hearts.] SECT. II.

[ 40] IT was the generall Preface of Antiquity, used in the Cele∣bration of this Sacrament, for the Minister to say, [Lift up your Hearts,] and the People to answer, [Wee lift them up unto the Lord.] This [Sursum Corda] Calvina 1.101 hath objected a∣gainst you; and your Cardinall confessing that this Preface b 1.102 was in use in all Liturgies of Antiquity, aswell Greeke as La∣tine, and continued in the Church of Rome unto this day; Then

answereth, thatc 1.103 Hee that seeketh Christ in the Eucharist, and worshippeth him, if hee thinke of Christ, and not of the Cares of earthly things, hee hath his heart above. So hee. As though the word [Above] meant, as the Subject, the person of Christ in the Eucharist, and not his place of residence in the highest Hea∣vens; contrary to the word in the Greeke* 1.104 Liturgies, which is [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Above, wherein the Church alludeth to that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] of the Apostle, Coloss. 3. 1. Seeke the things that are above, where Christ is at the right hand of God, as your owned 1.105 Durandus, the Ex∣positor of the Romish Masse, doth acknowledge. Saint Augu∣stine [ 10] saying,e 1.106 It is not without Cause, that it is said, Lift up your hearts; Hee sheweth the Cause to be, that wee, who are here at the Bottome, might (according to that of the Psalmist) Praise God in the highest.

This, one would thinke, is plaine enough, but that is much more, which wee have already proved out of the Fathers, by their Antithesis, and Opposition betweene the Altar on Earth, and the other in Heaven; where wee have heard* 1.107 Chrysostome di∣stinguishing them that fasten their thoughts upon this Below, from Them that seeke Christ in Heaven, as hee doth Choughs [ 20] from Eagles. Ambrose, as they that behold the Image, from them that contemplate upon the Truth.* 1.108 Nazianzen, as they that looke upon the Signes, from them that see the Things; and to contemplate upon the Better Altar in Heaven. And the Coun∣cel of* 1.109 Nice, as they that stoope downe, from them that looke up aloft. And wee may not forget the Observation which* 1.110 Atha∣nasius made of Christ, in his discourse of Eating his Flesh, and drinking his Blood; purposely making mention of his Ascen∣sion into Heaven, thereby to draw their thoughts from earthly Imaginations, and to consider him as being in Heaven; as did [ 30] also Saint* 1.111 Augustine. [ 30]

Cyril of Hierusalem is a Father whom you have often solli∣cited to speake for your Cause in other Cases, but all in vaine; shall wee hearken to him in this? Hee interpreting these words [Lift up your Hearts,] will not have it onely to signifie a seque∣string of your thoughts from earthly Cares to spirituall and hea∣venly (which you say was the meaning of the Councel of Nice, as if that Lifting up their Hearts had beene onely an exercising of their thoughts upon that in the hands of the Priest, or on the Altar beneath;) No, but hee saith that it isf 1.112 To have our [ 40] hearts in heaven with God the lover of man-kind: even as did al∣so Saintg 1.113 Augustine interpret this Admonition to be A lif∣ting

up of hearts to heaven. Whom as you have* 1.114 heard leaving our Eucharisticall Sacrifice on this Altar, so would hee have us to seeke for our Priest in heaven: namely, as Origen more expresly said, Not on earth, but in heaven: accordingly Oecu∣menius, placing the Host and Sacrifice where Christs Invisible Temple is, even in heaven. {fleur-de-lys} Agreeable to this are the words of Hierome, whom notwithstanding your owne 1 1.115 Doctor hath objected as a Patron, for defence of your Romish Masse;2 1.116 Let us ascend with our Lord into the great [ 10] Chamber prepared and made cleane; and let us receive of him the Cup of the new Testament: and there keeping the Passeover with him, let us be made drunke with the wine of Sobriety. All, as plaine as plainnesse it selfe. {fleur-de-lys}

Will you suffer one, whom the world knoweth to have been as excellently versed in Antiquity as any other, to determine this Point? Hee will come home unto you;h 1.117 In the time of the ancient Church of Rome (saith hee) the people did not run hi∣ther and thither to behold that which the Priest doth shew, but prostrating their Bodies on the ground, they lift up their minds to [ 20] heaven, giving thanks to their Redeemer. So hee. Thus may wee justly appeale, as in all other Causes of moment, so in this, from this degenerate Church of Rome, to the sincere Church of Rome, in the Primitive times; like as one is repor∣ted to have Appealed from Caesar sleeping to Caesar waking. Our difference then can be no other than was that betweene Mary and Stephen, noted by Ambrose,i 1.118 Mary, because shee sought to touch Christ on earth, could not; but Stephen touched him, who sought him in heaven. A third Argument followeth.

[ 30] That the ancient Fathers cendemned the Romish worship by their Descriptions of Divine Adoration. SECT. III.

ALl Divine Adoration of a meere Creature is Idolatry; hereunto accord these sayings ofk 1.119 Antiquity: No Ca∣tholike Christian doth worship, as a Divine Power, that which is created of God. Or thus, I feare to worship earth, lest hee con∣demne [ 40] mee, who created both Heaven and earth. Or thus, If I should worship a Creature, I could not be named a Christian. It were a tedious superfluity, in a matter so universally confessed by your selves, and all Christians, to use Witnesses unnecessa∣rily. Wee adde the Assumption. But the Romish Adoration of the Sacrament is an attributing of Divine Honour to a meere Creature, the Consecrated Bread. For that it is still Bread, you shall find to have beene the Doctrine of Primitive Fathers, if you shall but have the patience to stay untill wee deliver unto

you a* 1.120 Synopsis of their Catholike Iudgement herein; after that wee have duly examined your Romish Doctrine by your owne Principles, which is the next point.

CHAP. V.

An Examination of the Romish Adoration of the Sacra∣ment [ 10] in the Masse, to prove it Idolatrous, by dis∣cussing your owne Principles.

The State of the Question.

IDolatry, by the Distinction of your Iesuites, is ei∣ther Materiall, or Formall. The Materiall you call that, when the Worshipper adoreth something in stead of God, in a wrong perswasion that it is God; otherwise you judge the Worship to be a [ 20] Formall Idolatry. Now because many of your seduced Roma∣nists are perswaded that your Romish worship, in your Masse, cannot be subject either to Materiall or Formall Idolatry, it con∣cerneth us in Conscience, both for the honour of God, and safety of all that feare God, to prove Both. Wee begin at that which you confesse to be a Materiall Idolatry.

That the Romish Adoration of the Host, in the hand of the Priest, is necessarily a Materiall Idolatry, by reason of many hundred [ 30] confessed Defects: whereof Seven concerne the Matter of the Sacrament. SECT. I.

IT is a point unquestionable among you, that if the thing, in the hand of the Priest, be not duly Consecrated, then the Mat∣ter Adored is but a meere Creature; and your Adoration must needs be, at the least, a Materiall Idolatry. The Seven defects, set downe in your Romanea 1.121 Missall, and by yourb 1.122 Iesuite, are these; First, If the Bread be not of Wheat; or secondly, Be [ 40] corrupt; or thirdly, the Wine be turned Vinegar; or fourthly, of sowre; or fifthly, unripe Grapes; or sixthly, be stinking, or im∣perfectly mixt with any liquor of any other kinde, the Consecration

is void: so that neither Body or Blood of Christ can be there pre∣sent; seventhly, yea, and if there be more Water than Wine. So you. All which Defects how easily they may happen, beyond the understanding of every Consecrating Priest, let Bakers and Vintners judge.

That there are Sixe otherc 1.123 confessed Defects, incident to either Element in the Eucharist, which may hinder the Consecra∣tion; and necessarily inferre an Idolatrous Ado∣ration, [ 10] in respect of the Forme of Consecrating. SECT. II.

AS thus; If the Priest faile in Pronunciation of these words, [Hoc est corpus meum:] or in these, Hic est calix sanguinis mei: novi, & aeterni Testamenti: mysterium fide•••• qui pro vobis, & pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Which your Romane Missall and Doctors say may happen, in either of [ 20] both, sixe maner of wayes: first, by Addition; or secondly, by Omission; thirdly, by Mutation and Change of any one Syllable, which may alter the sense of the speech; fourthly, by Interruption of voice, and by too long pausing in uttering of the words; fifthly, by Corruption of any word; sixthly, by some Interposition of words betweene, which are impertinent. Each one of these faults, (say you) concerning either Element, doth so disannull the Consecration, that The thing adored is still but Bread and Wine, and therefore the worship thereof must be a Materiall Idolatry. So you.

[ 30] And how easie it is for the Priest (that wee may use your owne Examples) to say, Hoc est Cor meum; or, Hoc est Cor-pus; or, Meum corpus est; or, Hic erit Calix; or, as the Tale goeth of a Priest, who (having many Hosts before him to be consecra∣ted, lest hee might erre in his Grammar, in using the singular number for the plurall) Consecrated in these words,d 1.124 Haec sunt corpora mea; These are my Bodies: wee say for the possibility of these and the like Lapses (beside this last from the want of wit) the manifold infirmities of mans speech, either upon Amazement, or Temulencie, or Temerity and Negligence, [ 40] or Imperfection of a Stammering tongue, can give you a shrewd guesse.

That there are Foure other confessed kinde of Defects, in respect of the Priests Intention, whereby the Consecration being hindred, the Romish Adoration must needs be materially Idolatrous. SECT. III.

AS for Example, first,c 1.125 If the Priest in Consecrating (saith your Cardinall) have no intention to consecrate at all; or [ 10] (to speake from your Romish Missal it selfe) secondly, If his virtuall Intention in Consecrating be not to do as the Church doth; or thirdly, If hee should consecrate but in mockery; or fourthly, Hee having more Hosts before him than hee is aware of; if hee in∣tend to consecrate fewer than there are before him; and yet not know∣ing which of them all to omit. Of the Easinesse of all these Defects, the possibility of retchlesnesse, of infidelity, of moc∣kery, and of obliviousnesse in some Priests may sufficiently prognosticate; each of which inferreth a confessed Materiall Idolatry. [ 20]

That there are Sixe other Defects able to frustrate the Consecra∣tion, by reason of the person of the Priest himselfe, as being Incompetent for want of due Baptisme. SECT. IV.

FOr first you have aa 1.126 Case of one being a Priest, who [ 30] had not beene baptized; and next concerning Defects of Bap∣tisme, you resolve (as before of pronunciation of the forme of the Eucharist)b 1.127 that if in pronunciation of the wordes of Baptisme [Baptizo te in nomine Patris, Filij, & Spiritus Sancti] the Minister (whether man, or woman) shall vary one word, which may corrupt the true sense of the words, although but in one Syllable, or Letter, be it either by adding, removing, changing, or by any of the sixe Defects, (already spoken of) as in saying, Ego te baptizo in nomine Patriae, &c. or the like, then the whole Consecration is of no effect. The possibility of [ 40] womens erring in their ministery of Baptisme, Cardinal Pole may seeme to teach in that his Article, whereby it is inquired, c 1.128 Whether Parsons, Vicars, and Curates be diligent in teaching women to baptize Children after the maner of the Church.

Take with you another Case, supposed by your selves, the d 1.129 Author delivereth it at length, the briefe is this: The woman bap∣tizeth an Infant, because it is the Child of a noble man, in Rosewater, the Baptisme is voyd; the Childe is afterwards ordained a Bishop, & he is after that sent by the Pope into divers parts of the world, and by him innumerable Priests are ordained; after the death of the Bishop, the case is made knowne, but who they were that had beene ordained cannot possibly be knowne, whose Ordi∣nations are all invalid, and their Ministery and Consecrations of [ 10] no effect. What remedy now in this Case? None (saith the Author) at all, except there be a Privilege in the Pope to consti∣tute all them Priests, who had beene so irregularly ordained, onely by his word, Dicendo, sint Saderdotes, saying, Be they all Priests. So hee, who notwithstanding had rather thinke the Case could not possibly happen, than to trust to this Remedy. How-ever it might be in this one, the possibility of the other Six Defects neither man nor woman can deny, every one con∣cluding a Materiall Idolatry.

[ 20]

That there are manifold confessed possible Defects; disabling the person of the Priest to Consecrate, in respect of his undue Ordination; whereby is occasioned a Materiall Idolatry. SECT. V.

YOu have furthermore* 1.130 confessed, that, for want of due Ordination of the Priest, the Sacrament remaineth in his [ 30] former nature onely of Bread, and Wine; as if hee be an In∣truder, and not ordained at all: or else of the forme of Ordi∣nation, viz. [Accipe potestatem offerendi Sacrificium: Et Accipe Spiritum Sanctum, quorum peccataremiseris, remissa, &c.] As if it hath beene corrupted, by missing so much as one Syllable, or Letter, by Addition, Detraction, or any of the Sixe Errors be∣fore rehearsed; as Accipe Spiritu Sancto, for Spiritum Sanctum; or, Accipe potestatem ferendi Sacrificium, for Offerendi, or the like; {fleur-de-lys} to the1 1.131 Altering of the Sense of the Speech. {fleur-de-lys} [ 40]

That there are many hundred confessed Defects, which may nullifie the Consecration, to make the Romish Adoration Idolatrous, in respect of Insufficiencies, which might be incident unto the Prae-ordainers of that Priest, whoso∣ever hee be, that now Consecrateth; for causing a Materiall Idolatry. SECT. VI. [ 10]

IF thea 1.132 Bishop that ordained this Priest, which now conse∣crateth, were not a true Priest himselfe, truly ordained, or duly baptized; or else the next Bishop before him, or yet any one in the same line of Ordainers, untill you come to Saint Pe∣ter, for the space (now) of a thousand six hundred yeares, where∣of your Iesuite saith;b 1.133 The Defect of Ordination is seene in many Cases, wherein, Progredi possumus ferè in Infinitum (that is) wee may proceed almost infinitely. So hee. Thinking belike that if wee should in this number of yeares allow unto every Bishop [ 20] ordaining the continuance of twenty yeares Bishop upward to Saint Peter, the number of them all would amount to fourscore Bishops; among whom if any one were an Intruder, or Vnor∣dained, then this Priest faileth in his Priest-hood. Now of these kindes yourc 1.134 Historians afford us Examples of your Popes, some dissolving the Ordinations of their Predecessors, even to the cutting off of oned 1.135 Popes fingers, wherewith hee had used to consecrate. {fleur-de-lys} You may also reade of One, who consecrated an huge number of2 1.136 Priests, Whose Ordinations were all voyd, albeit they had exercised their functions of Consecrating, in the [ 30] Masse, for ten or twelve yeares space. {fleur-de-lys}

Yet is not this all, for unto these are to be added the other Defects, to wit, want of Baptisme, whether for want of due Intention, being three; or undue Pronunciation, being six; or the Errors either of Intention, or Pronunciation in Ordination, all which make eighteene: and these being multiplied by foure∣score (which is the number of Bishop-ordainers from this Bishop to Saint Peter) the totall, wee suppose, will at the least amount unto a Thousand possible Defects, each one whereof, if it hap∣pen, doth quite frustrate and annull the Consecration of this [ 40] Priest, whosoever hee be, that now saith Masse; and leaveth to the people nothing but the Substance of the Creatures of Bread and Wine to be Adored, in stead of Christ Iesus, the Sonne of God. And yet in this Summe are not reckoned the foresaid Defects concerning the Matter, or Forme of Consecration, or of

the Priests Intention therein, or else of his possible Intrusion into this Function of Consecrating of this one Priest, now supposed to bee ordained; every Defect being of force in it selfe to inferre necessarily a Materiall Idolatry in your Romish Masse.

Now rather than you shall call these our Instances odious, or malicious, you must accuse your owne Romish Church, be∣cause wee have alleged no Testimony, but out of your owne publke Romish Missall, Cardinalls, Iesuits, and other Au∣thors [ 10] privileged in your Church. Wee are now in the high point of Christian Religion, even the principall part of Gods Royalty, Divine Adoration, not to be trisled withall. There∣fore now, if ever, shew your selves conscionable Divines, by freeing your Romish Masse from a Formall Idolatry in these forenamed Respects, concerning your confessed Materiall Idola∣try; and do it by some grounds of Truth, or else abandon your Profession, as most damnably Idolatrous.

[ 20]

CHAP. VI.

That the Romish Masse-worship is a Formall Idolatry, notwithstanding any Pretence that by your Romish Do∣ctors hath beene made to the Contrary.

[ 30] The State of the Question. SECT. I.

VPon this occasion, oh! how your Summists, Theo∣logues, and Casuists do bestirre themselves, for the vindicating of your Church from the guilt of Formall Idolatry? The Briefe of your Defence is this:a 1.137 Although (say they, in the Margin) there be no true Consecration, by reason of divers [ 40] Defects, yet in him who upon a Morall certainty, with a sincere mind and good intention, doth adore Bread, it is but Materiall, and no Formall Idolatry, so that hee have an Habituall condition, as being so disposed in his mind, not to give a Divine honour unto it, if hee knew it to be but Bread. As for Example; Hee that giveth an Almes to a Rich man, being probably perswaded that hee is not rich, the Act proceedeth from a pious Intention. And, As it was no Sin in Iacob to lye with Leah, because hee thought her to be his wife;

so in this case it is no formall Idolatry to worship Bread, being Mo∣rally perswaded that it is Christ. Thus they.

Your Pretences herein are three; Morall Certainty, Good Intent, and (at least) Habituall Condition. But alas! all this is but Sowing Fig-leaves together, which will never be able to cover your foule shame of grosse Idolatry. To begin first with that which you call Morall Certainty. [ 10]

[ 20]

That the Pretence of Morall Certainty of worshipping of Bread, instead of Christ, cannot free the Romish Church from Formall Idolatry. SECT. II.

OVr Confutation is grounded upon divers impregnable [ 30] Reasons, one whereof is taken from the Iealousie of God in his worship; the second from the Faith required in a true worshipper; the third from the nature of an Oath; and the last from the Vncertainty of that, which you call Morall Cer∣tainty.

First then, although Morall and Conjecturall perswasions might excuse mens Actions in divers Cases, yet in an Object of Divine Worship it is utterly condemnable, even because of the Iealousie of the Almighty, who expresseth himselfe to be a Iealous God, Exod. 20. signifying, asb 1.138 you know, that Hee [ 40] will not indure any consort in his worship; his Motto being this, I am, and there is no Other. Even as in the Case of mortall Ma∣jesty, when as a subject, building upon a Morall Certainty one∣ly,

shall question the Title and Right of his Soveraigne establi∣shed in his Throne, hee becometh guilty of High Treason.

Secondly, all Divine Worship must be performed with a Di∣vine Faith, which is an Infallible perswasion of the God-head of that which wee honour as God, as it is written: Hee that com∣eth to God, must believe that God is, Heb. 11. 6. and againe, You must aske in Faith, nothing doubting, Iac. 1. because this is the nature of Faith, as the Apostle describeth it; Faith is the Hy∣postasis of things not seene. Heb. 11. That is, (to take yourc 1.139 owne [ 10] Comment) Faith ••aketh those things, which are believed, no lesse certaine than if they did subsist: whereby wee are taught both the nature and necessitie of Faith in Divine Worship. But Morall and Conjecturall Certainty is not an Hypostasis, which im∣plieth an Infallibilitie of Truth, but an Hypothesis, and supposi∣tion of that which may be otherwise, and hath in it nothing but Vncertainty at all; of which more* 1.140 hereafter.

Thirdly, God himselfe commandeth his People by his Pro∣phet, saying, Thou shalt worship mee, and (in* 1.141 Greeke, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) shalt sweare by my Name. Swearing then is an Adoration, by [ 20] Invocating of God; and his owne peculiar Prerogative. Hear∣ken now. By this Law of God, none may sweare by any thing as God, which hee dare not sweare is God: But your Romish Professors, in your Masse, Invocate this Sacrament thus,d 1.142 O Lambe of God, which takest away the Sins of the world, have mercie upon us. And what Romish Professor is there who sweareth not By the Masse (meaning the Consecrated Host) as by Christ himselfe? Notwithstanding, no one of your Romish Priests (by reason of the manifold Defects incident thereunto, as you have heard) durst ever sweare that this, which is now Consecra∣ted [ 30] by him on the Altar, is not substantially Bread, or that it is the Body of Christ. It must therefore follow, that your Adora∣tion having no better Certainty, than (as you have confessed) to adore it with an [If it be Christ,] is a faithlesse prophanation of the name of the Son of God, and of his Worship. This Point, concerning Faith in every Worshipper, will be confes∣sed * 1.143 afterwards.

In the last place (that wee may ruinate the very foundation of your Excuse) your Pretence of Morall Certainty cometh to [ 40] be examined, which you have exemplified by one giving an Almes to a poore man, who peradventure hath no need: and of Iacobs lying ignorantly with her that was not his wife. These, say wee, are Cases farre different from this which wee have in hand, because Gods Almoner (you know) is not bound to enquire of a man, whom hee seeth to appeare to be miserable and poore, whether hee be a Counterfeit or no; for Charity is not suspicious, saith the Apostle Saint Paul. Iacob, indeed, was bound to know onely his owne wife, but if hee had had any probable

or Morall Cause of doubt, would that holy Patriarke (thinke you) have beene so deluded, or over-reached a second, and a third time, to defile his body by an unchaste Bed? But the Causes of your Doubtings are see forth and numbred by threes, Sixes, Twenties, Hundreds, untill you come to a Thousand, and (as your Iesuite hath said) Almost infinite Defects. For in∣deed if there be (as appeareth) a Thousand hazards in every Masse of any one Priest, then in two Priests, as many more, and so forward; so that if one should heare in his time the Masses of Ten, and Twenty Priests, what multitudes of Thousands of [ 10] Defects would the reckoning make? But wee need say no more, than hath already been confessed of Almost infinite, and (con∣sequently) as many Doubts of an Idolatrous worship; wherein there cannot be so much Morall Certainty, as that, in any one ge∣neration of men from Christ's time, each one of that off-spring hath beene chastly borne, whereunto what Christian is there that dare be sworne?

CHALLENGE. [ 20]

COnsider (wee beseech you, for Gods Cause, for wee are now in the Cause of God) whether our God, who will be knowne to be transcendently Iealous of his owne Honour, would ever ordaine such a worship of a Sacrament, whereby men must needs be still more obnoxious to that, which you call a Materiall Idolatry, by many hundred-fold, than possibly any can be to any materiall Parricide, or materiall Murther, or materiall Adulte∣ry, or any other hainous and materiall Transgression, that can be named under the Sun. Thus much of your first Pretence, for this present, untill wee come to receive the* 1.144 Confessions of [ 30] your owne Doctors in this very point.

That the Second Romish Pretence, which is of a Good Intent, cannot free your Adoration of the Host from Formall Idolatry. SECT. III.

LEt us heare your Cardinall;a 1.145 Honour (saith hee) depen∣deth upon the Intention, so that as hee, who should contemp∣tuously [ 40] abuse the unconsecrated Bread, thinking it to be Consecrated, should grievously offend Christ; contrariwise hee, who certainly beleeving the Bread to be Christs Body, shall Adore the same, doth principally and formally Adore Christ, and not the Bread. So hee, even with the same Sophistry, from onely such a seeming Con∣trariety, wherewith you use to pleade for Merits: (to wit) if evill workes deserve damnation, then good workes deserve

eternall life. But will you be pleased to heare the same Cardi∣nall speake in earnest, from the Principles of true Logike? b 1.146 Although an evill Intention doth 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and corruptiun Act otherwise good, yet it followeth not that a good Intent should justisie an evill Act, because no Act is good, except all the Causes thereof be good; but any Act is evill upon any one Defect. So hee; which his Conclusion is held as universally true in all Schooles, whe∣ther Christian, or Heathen, as any point of Morality can be. Wherefore it followeth not, that because a man doth some∣thing [ 10] to the contempt of Christ, in abusing that which hee thinketh to be Christ, that therefore the honour, which hee doth to that, which hee falsly believeth to be Christ, should be an Adoration of Christ: as all Heathenish Idolatry, in wor∣shipping stocks and stones, in an opinion of adoring the true God, do witnesse to the world, as your owne* 1.147 Confessions will confirme.

{fleur-de-lys} It may not seeme a thing superfluous to apply to our former Answer the Testimony of your Iesuite Lessius, judg∣ing it1 1.148 A thing incredible, for God to equall mans love unto [ 20] him (in the good) as hee would do Sin, wherewith hee is offen∣ded: for who will say (saith hee) that a man injuring his Prince, and violating his Lawes so, as to deserve death, shall e∣qually satisfie it, after hee shall be sorry for his offence, and love him, and promise amendment? will any affirme, if the nature of the thing bee duly considered, that the Prince is bound to be aswell pleased with the griefe of that man, for his offence, proceeding from love, as hee was offended at the inju∣rie, and that hee ought not to punish him? nay, but the man hath deserved to lose both Land and Life, although hee be a thousand times sorry for his offence: much lesse possible is it for man to returne an equall Compensation unto God. So hee, [ 30] which sheweth sufficiently that there is a Disproportion of Contraries, in their divers respects. {fleur-de-lys}

CHALLENGE.

DO you not perceive what a patched Cloake of Sophistry [ 40] your Cardinall cast upon your Good Intent, in your Ado∣ration, to cover the filthinesse thereof, if it might be? and how by another Position hee rent the same in pieces, when hee had done? Againe, you stand thus farre, furthermore, condemna∣ble in your selves in this Point, whilest as you seeke to free your Adoration from Idolatry, by Pretence of a Good Intent; and

notwithstanding hold a Good Intention not to be sufficient there∣unto, except it be qualified and formed with an Habituall Con∣dition, which is your Third and last Pretence; as fond and false as either of the former, whereof hereafter.

That the Third Romish Pretence of an Habituall Condition, in the Worshipper, excuseth him not from formall Idolatry; proved first by Scripture. SECT. IV. [ 10]

HAbituall Condition you have interpreted to stand thus; * 1.149 If hee that chanceth to worship onely Bread be in that Act so disposed in himselfe, that hee would not worship the same Bread, as Christ, if hee knew it were but Bread, and not Christ; and by this you teach, that the Act (which you call a Materiall Idolatry) is made not onely excusable, but (your* 1.150 owne words) honest and commendable also. So you. What execrable Doctrine is this that wee heare? which cannot be justifiable except you will justifie the Murtherers of the members of Christ; and of Christ himselfe? First, of the members of [ 20] Christ, wee reade of one Saul, afterwards Paul, breathing out threatnings, and slanders against them, Act. 9. 1. and persecu∣ting the Church, 1. Cor. 15. & Galath. 1. and drawing both men and women to death, Act. 22. 4. And all this, not malici∣ously, but (as you heare himselfe say) Ignorantly, 1. Tim. 1. 13. and with a good Conscience, Act. 23. 1. and in zeale, Phil. 3. 6. A fairer expression of a Good Intent, in a wicked practice, can∣not be, than this was: and as much may be said for his Habituall Condition, namely, that if hee had then (as afterwards) knowne [ 30] Christ to have beene the Lord of life, and those murthered Chri∣stians, to have beene his mysticall Members, hee would rather have exposed himselfe to Martyrdome, than to have martyred those Saints of God. This Consequence directly appeareth, first by his Answer, in his miraculous Conversion, saying,* 1.151 Who are thou, Lord? next by his detestation of his Fact,* 1.152 I am un∣worthy to be called an Apostle, because I persecuted the Church, &c. then by his Acknowledgement of Gods especiall mercie,* 1.153 But God had mercie on mee. Afterwards by his Labour for winning soules to the Faith: I have laboured more abundantly than they [ 40] all. And lastly, in that hee was one of those Actors, of whom Christ himselfe foretold, saying,* 1.154 They shall draw you before Iudgement seats, and when they shall persecute you, they will thinke that they do God good service. Which also plainly argueth, that their and his perswasion of so doing proceded from a Morall Certainty, Good Intent, and Habituall Condition.

From these Members let us ascend to our Head, Christ the

Lord of Glory; what thinke you of the Iewes? of whom Saint Peter sayd, You have murthered the Prince of life. Act. 3. 15. But did they this Voluntarily, and knowingly, as understanding him to have beene the Redeemer of the world, and indeed the Prince of life? they did not, for the same Apostle testifyeth in their behalfe, saying, I know you did it ignorantly, as did also your Rulers. Act. 3. 17. If this be not sufficient, heare the voice of the person that was slaine, Christ himselfe, who did so farre acquit them, saying, They know not what they do. Luk. 23. 24. Ignorantly then, in a Conjecturall Certainty, but yet with Good [ 10] Intent; of whom Saint Paul witnesseth in these words, I beare them witnesse, that they have the Zeale of God, but not according to knowledge. Rom. 10. But what for Habituall Condition? were they not bent in their owne minds (if they had under∣stood what Christ was) to have abhorred that so heinous a guilt of the death of the Sonne of God? questionlesse, for so saith the Apostle: If they had knowne, they would not have crucifyed the Lord of Glory. 1. Cor. 2. 8. Wee conclude, seeing these Iewes, notwithstanding their Morall Certainty, (being seduced by their Priests) or else their Good Intent of doing God good ser∣vice [ 20] therein; or yet their Habituall Condition, not to have cru∣cified Christ, if they had truly knowne him, were neverthelesse by Saint Peter condemned, yea and of themselves, as Formall and verily Murtherers of Christ; then (ô you Romish worship∣pers of the Host) must it necessarily follow, that in your Mas∣ses you are equally all Formally Idolaters, notwithstanding any of the same three Pretences to the contrary.

Wherefore, as Salomon speaketh of an Adulterous woman; * 1.155 Shee eateth, and wipeth her mouth, saying, I have done no wic∣kednesse; so may wee say of Idolatrous Worshippers, and their [ 30] Proctors: for what else are these your three Romish Preten∣ces, but like such mouth-wipes? or as Anodyna, and stupifying Medicines, which take away the Sense of the diseased person, but do not cure the disease? So do you delude miserable peo∣ple with false Pretences, lest they, discerning the grosnesse and ouglinesse of your Idolatry, might abhorre that worship, and abandon your Romish worshippers.

That the former Romish Pretences have no warrant [ 40] from Antiquity. SECT. V.

THe number of Ancient Fathers, whose workes are yet ex∣tant (who lived within Six or Seven hundred yeares after Christ) are recorded to have beene about 200. out of whose monuments of Christian learning your chiefest Disputers could never hitherto produce anyone that justified your Romish wor∣ship,

by so much as in distinguishing of Materiall and Formall Ido∣latry; nor yet by qualifying any Idolatry under pretence of either Morall Certainty, or Good Intent, or yet Habituall Condition; and therefore must wee judge that they never gave Assent to this your Sorcery. For wee may not be so injurious to the memory of so many, so famously learned, and Catholike Doctors of the Church of Christ, that they could not; or of persons so holy, and zealous of Gods honour, and of mens Salvation, that they would not satisfie mens Consciences, to free them out of thus many and miserable perplexities, wherewith your now [ 10] Romish Profession of Adoration of the Host is so* 1.156 Almost in∣finitely intangled.

CHAP. VII.

That the Romish Adoration, notwithstanding your former Pretences, is Formally Idolatrous; proved by foure [ 20] Grounds of Romish Profession.

The first is your Definition of Idolatry. SECT. I.

DIvine honour (saith your Iesuitea 1.157 Valentia) is a Te∣stimony of excellencie, whether in word or outward office, that a man doth performe, whereby hee doth [ 30] intend to beget in others such an estimation of God, unto that which hee honoureth, as is proper un∣to the Majestie of God. So that Idolatry is an Error in the under∣standing (saith your Iesuiteb 1.158 Tolet) in yielding divine worship to that which is not God, whether by praising, invocating, sacrificing, or prostrating our selves to that which is not God. In a word, Ido∣latry comprehendeth all religious superstition (saith your Iesuite c 1.159 Lornus) in worshipping of any thing as God, which is not God. So they, most Theologically and truly. [ 40]

CHALLENGE.

NOw apply you these points of your Definition unto your Host, in the hand of the Priest, which by your owne Con∣fessions may possibly be, and by our proofes cannot possibly but be (after Consecration) Bread still, whereunto notwithstanding hee prostrateth himselfe, sweareth, by, and invocateth upon, as being in it selfe the person of Christ; the Priest himselfe saying, [ 10] d 1.160 O holy Host, &c. O Lambe of God, &c. whereby also, accor∣ding to your Definition of Idolatry, you your selves do seeke to professe, and thereby to beget in others an opinion of a God∣head in the Sacrament, as whereunto Divine honour doth pro∣perly belong. How then can you free your selves from the Crime of formall Idolatry, by pretence of Ignorance, and error of true knowledge of the thing falsly adored, seeing that Idola∣try (as you your selves have also defined) is an Error and Igno∣rance in the judgement of the Worshipper? This were, as if one, defining a disease to be a Distemperature of Humours, should [ 20] notwithstanding therefore deny a man to be sicke, because his humours are distempered.

II. That Romish Worship is proved to be Formally Idolatrous, by Consequence taken from a Romish Principle, concer∣ning Co-adoration, or joynt-worship of Christ with Bread. SECT. II.

[ 30] CO-adoration is when any thing is worshipped joyntly with God in a Divine Worship, which worship by the Law of God (which saith, Thou shalt have no other Gods but mee) is per∣fectly Idolatry, by your ownee 1.161 Confessions; and for feare of this kind of Idolatry, your Claudius Sainctesf 1.162 taught that The signes in the Eucharist are not to be adored with the same ho∣nour as Christ is. And that thereforeg 1.163 Bread is not to be adored in the Sacrament with Christ's Body, lest that the people, being not able to distinguish the Body of Christ from Bread, should fall into Idolatry. And the person communicating Orally (as you say) the [ 40] Body of Christ, now in his mouth, is not to be adored Regularly,

but why?h 1.164 Because (say you) man being capable of honour, it might fall out, by little and little, that hee should be honoured as God. So your owne Iesuites and Others. Yet (not to do you wrong) in this Contemplation Christ, by reason of the Hypo∣staticall Vnion of his God-head (being no meere Creature) is wholly excepted: whom wee are taught by the Fathers of a Generalli 1.165 Councel to adore, not in both his distinct natures, but whole Christ. [ 10]

CHALLENGE.

WEe suppose that there is not any of your owne Romish Sect, albeit most superstitious, who would worship [ 20] with Divine Worship either the Signes, or the Appearance of flesh, or the Priest, whiles the Sacrament is in his mouth, with∣out at least a Morall Perswasion, viz. that hee may so do; nor without a Good intent, viz. that it is well done; nor without ha∣bituall Condition, viz. not to do so, if hee knew they were but Signes, Apparance of flesh, or hee meerely a Priest. If therefore there be any Idolatry, in adoring any of these things with Christ, then certainly much rather (which is your Case) is it Idolatry to worship with Divine honour, Bread, it being without Christ. [ 30]

III. That the Romish Worship is proved to be Formally Ido∣latrous in your Masse, by a Consequence from Romish Doctrine, touching Canonization of Saints. SECT. III.

COncerning your Popes Canonizing of Saints (see the [ 40] a 1.166 Marginals) you shall find that the Common opinion of your Church directeth you to thinke, that your Church cannot erre in this Function, and that all Christians are bound to be∣lieve the same; but how? upon a Morall and Conjecturall per∣swasion onely? No, upon a Divine and infallible Certitude, and why? Because (say they) if one Saint may be doubted of, then might also the Canonization of others be called into Question, so that it would be dangerous to worship any Saint, lest that wee should

worship a dead and a rotten, instead of a lively member of Christ: which were an Error pernicious, seeing that every lye, figment, and falshood in religious worship must needs be abominable unto God. So your Archbishop, with others. You will aske, what, maketh all this to the question in hand? give▪ us leave to tell you. [ 10]

[ 20] CHALLENGE.

THe same Archbishop Catharinusb 1.167 deduceth a necessity of an infallible assurance of the Canonization of every Saint, from the Infallibility which ought to be had, concerning the Consecration of the Eucharist, Thus; If the Worshipper may be deceived in adoring the Host, by mistaking Bread for the Body of Christ, then should it be Idolatry (saith hee) aswell as in the Hea∣then, who adored Heaven instead of God. So hee. Do you marke? aswell Idolatry, as that of the Heathen; whom neither Morall Certainty, nor Good Intent, or Habituall Condition could [ 30] ever free from a formall Idolatry. Our Argument, from your owne Confessions, will be this.

Whosoever may be mistaken, in adoring Bread instead of Christ's Body, may therein be held as Formall an Idolater as any Heathen. (This is your Bishops Proposition.) The Assumption. But any man among you may manifoldly be deceived, in taking Bread for Christ's Body. (Which hath beene your generall Con∣fession.) Our Conclusion must be; Therefore any of you, in adoring Bread for Christ, in this Sacrament, may be a Formall [ 40] Idolater.

IV. That the Romish Worship is proved to be a Formall Ido∣latry, by the Consequence used from the Conse∣cration of your Popes. SECT. IV.

SAlmeron, a Iesuite of prime note in your Church, endea∣voureth toc 1.168 prove that all men are bound to believe the new Pope, whensoever hee is Consecrated, to be the true Pope, [ 10] not onely with a Morall or Humane Assurance, but with a Di∣vine and infallible Faith; as were the Iewes bound to believe Christ Iesus, at his coming, to be the true Messias: that is (saith hee) with a Faith that cannot possibly be deceived. Wee have no∣thing to do with your Iesuits Position in this place, concerning the Infallibillity of Beliefe of the Creation, and Election of your Popes, which wee have elsewhere proved to be a* 1.169 Grosse Imposture. But wee are to argue from his Supposition, as for Example.

CHALLENGE. [ 20]

YOur Iesuited 1.170 grounded his Assertion of an Infallible faith due to be had, touching the Creation of your Popes, upon a Supposition; and his Conclusion upon the like infallible Be∣liefe, which men ought to have, concerning the Consecration of the Eucharist, wherein (saith hee) if there should be any Vncer∣tainty, so that our Faith should depend upon the Intention of the Priest, in like maner might every one doubt, whether hee may adore the Sacrament, as being not truly consecrated; as also make doubt [ 30] of the Priest himselfe, as being not rightly ordained. So hee; who therefore in all these requireth a Faith infallible. All these fore-cited Confessions of your owne Divines, as first concer∣ning your Definition of Idolatry; next in the point of Co-adora∣tion of the Creature together with the Creator; thirdly, in your Beliefe of the Canonization of Saints; and lastly, in the Crea∣tion of the Pope, which are but humane Institutions, do enforce much more a necessity of Infallibility, in every Adoration in∣stituted by God.

Now among all the Schismes of Anti-Popes, sometimes of [ 40] two, sometimes of three at once, and that for forty or fifty yeares space together, if any one of those Popes, in his time, had heard any Papist saying to him: you may not be offended, although I hold your Adversary (as for example Vrbane) to be the true Pope, and yield to him all Fealty and Obedience, for I do this to a Good Intent, in a Morall Certainty, that hee is truly elected Pope; and in an habituall Condition, not to acknowledge

him, if I knew him not to be Pope, wherein if I erre, it is but a Materiall Disloyalty; would not the Pope, notwithstanding all these Pretenses, judge this man to be Formally an Anti-Papist, and pierce him with his Thunder-bolt of Anathema, as Popes have often dealt with Cardinals, Princes, and Emperours in like Case? yet what is this Glowormes slimy shine to the glory of Divine Majesty?

[ 10] {fleur-de-lys} An Answer to a Conceited and Deceiptfull Impious Objection of a bold Spectacle-maker, a Iesuite; Shewing his Spectacles to be but Counterfeit. SECT. V.

YOur Iesuit, in his Booke of Spectacles, made in Confuta∣tion of a Iudicious and Religious Knight, among many other of his Paradoxes and Absur••ities (as if concerning our present Question hee had meant to excell himselfe, in the same kinde) after his most diligent search into every Cor∣ner, [ 20] where to finde an Evasion, by the helpe of Spectacles of his own making, yet could spie no other, than that poore little Crevise, specifyed in his words following: If Christ (saith hee) be not there, (in the Sacrament after Consecration) wee are in danger to worship him, where hee is not; and if he be there, then are you in danger, in not worshipping him, where hee is. How then are you Protestants more safe than wee? So your Ie∣suite. But most Sophistically. In Answer whereunto, the Protestants can say no lesse, than that this Objection is Falla∣cious, Impious, and Impudent. The notable Sophistry whereof appeareth in this; because of an Extreme Dispa∣rity [ 30] betweene your Romish Terme of Worshipping by a Con∣jecturall Supposition, as, [I adore thee ô Christ, if thou be here,] and the Protestants Resolution of [not adoring with Divine honour] at all, that, which you your selves do not infallibly believe to be God. For that there ought to be no perfor∣mance of Divine worship, where there can be any danger of Idolatry, as is both proved by your owne Confessions, and illustrated by your owne Similitudes.

Your Confessions stand thus. I. Although there should be a possibility of Existence of the Body of Christ with the [ 40] substance of Bread;* 1.171 yet not to adore it, for feare of Idolatry. Item, Although Christ be in the mouth of the Communi∣cant, * 1.172 yet not to adore it there, for feare of Idolatry. Item, Al∣though it be possible Christ is there at all,* 1.173 yet not to adore ab∣solutely, because of the Possibility, that one may be deceived. Next, do but also Recognize your owne Similitude of* 1.174 Ia∣cob lying with Leah, instead of Rachel: and, that you may

make a more joynt Application, suppose that both these Si∣sters had beene presented before Iacob, masked and un∣knowne; would your Iesuite judge it to be a like security and safety in Iacob, to have taken either of them to his bed, be∣cause it was posible hee might have made choice of his owne wife, as it had beene to have abstained from admitting of either at that time, lest hee might have made choice of not his owne wife?

Wee have furthermore in the title of this Section called this an Impious Answer and Evasion; which wee are to prove from the Resolution, which Christ gave in his An∣swer [ 10] to the woman of Samaria, when she boasted of the wor∣ship of the Samaritanes, and preferred it before the Religion of the Iewes, a Religion which was then approved and pro∣fessed by Christ himselfe: You Samaritanes (saith Christ) worship you know not what; But wee (Iewes) know what wee worship, Ioh. 4. 22. where, our Lord, who is Truth and Life, determineth the Cause it selfe, namely, that if the Case so stand, in point of Gods worship, The worshipping of not knowing what, is damnable; and onely, the worshipping of knowing what, is justifiable. And this was alwaies Catholike [ 20] learning, in all Ages, untill your Romish Tyranny brought in this Samaritan kind of [Worshipping you know not what.] Wherein your worshippers faile most blindly both for mat∣ter, for maner, and for sense; as may be proved by the Igno∣rance of your worshippers; both concerning the Objects, Language, and Ceremonies of their worship.

Nor could this objection be made by this Iesuite, without some tincture of Impudencie, forasmuch as hee, by a seeming Case of Indifferencie, seeketh to excuse his Romish Sect from [ 30] Idolatry, for feare of [Danger of not adoring Christ where hee is,] when as notwithstanding, hee, with all his Complices, would condemne Protestants for arrant Heretikes and Con∣temners of Christ in [not adoring him (according to the Ro∣mish Religion) where (peradventure) hee is.] And this they do against all warrant of Antiquity; or else shew us, if you can, when ever any, that had the Title of a Father in the Church of Christ, allowed of any thing to be adored, with Divine Worship, without an Infallible perswasion of the Deity there∣of. Not to repeat the above specified Confessions of your [ 40] owne Doctors against this very Delusion. But what talke wee of Christian learning? Do but get by heart the Contents of the next Sections following, and then you will perceive, how much it importeth us to be zealous, in oppugning your thus professed Romish worship.{fleur-de-lys}

CHAP. VIII.

Of the Romish maner of Adoration, in Comparison with the Heathen.

That the Romish Adoration, by your former Pretences, justi∣fieth the vilest kind of Idolatry among [ 10] the Heathen. SECT. I.

THere is a double kind of Worship, the one is Di∣rect, and terminate, which pitcheth immedi∣atly upon the Creature, without Relation to the Creator, whereof your Cardinall Alan hath resolved, saying;a 1.175 The terminating and fix∣ing of Divine Honour upon any Creature, is a no∣torious Idolatry. The second kind is Relative Honour, having Relation to Christ; whereof your Cardinall Bellarmine hath [ 20] determined, saying,b 1.176 When [Latria] or divine worship is given to an Image, because of the Relation it hath to Christ, this is Ido∣latry, although it be given for Christ, or God, whether it be inter∣nall, or else externall, as Sacrifice. So hee. This wee say, first to put you in mind ofc 1.177 Very many of your Romish People, who adore Images Idolatrously; which although you would cloake, yet the Complaints and out-cries of your owne Romish* 1.178 Au∣thors will not suffer it to be concealed, One of them saying, that this your worship is more manifest than can be denied; even immediatly and terminately given by your people to the thing [ 30] it selfe, which they see and adore, and which all Christian lear∣ning teacheth to be Heathenish, in an high Degree. And also note infinite numbers of your Worshippers, who adore Idola∣trously, in the same maner of Relation, that which is here con∣demned by your Cardinall.

But to the point, your owne Iesuitesd 1.179 report that some [ 40]

Heathen Idolaters did worship Idols, beleeving that They were inspired with a Divine Spirit; next that they had soure kinde of perswasions for this their Beleefe, to wit, the Instructions of their Paganish Priests, the Example of the whole world in their times, the power of Devils, speaking in the Images; and lastly, an hu∣mane shape, which was presented unto them: neverthelesse so, that they sometimes honoured not the things themselves, but the Spirit which they thought them possessed withall. Will you permit us to compare this with that which you have called but your* 1.180 Materiall Idolatry? To this end, wee are to try whether [ 10] there hath beene any Pretence, for justifying your Romish, which might not as truly excuse and warrant that Heathenish Worship; which notwithstanding no Christian will deny to have been most Formally, and properly Idolatrous.

Your Morall, and Conjecturall Certainty would be compared in the first place. This the Heathens might pretend by the Reasons, by you already confessed, to wit, the Prescriptions of their Priests, their Idols speaking, and the Example of almost the whole vast world adoring them. Secondly, you please your selves with your Good Intent, that, in worshipping the Bread, [ 20] you thinke to adore Christ; and the Pagans (which also the whole world of Idolaters professed of themselves, and you your selves have confessed of them) in their most Formall Idolatry, were perswaded they worshipped a True God. Thirdly, you relye upon an Habituall Condition, namely, that although the thing which you adore, be Bread, yet your inward Resolution is not to give Divine Honour unto it, if you knew it were but Bread, and not Christ. But inquire you now into your owne Bibles, and you shall find that the Heathen were not inferiour unto you in this Modification also; for in the History of Bell and [ 30] the Dragon it is read, that the King of Babel, and other Babylo∣nians worshipped Bel with Divine honour, thinking it to live, untill such time as Daniel had discovered it to be but an Idol: and no sooner had the King perceived the Delusion, but pre∣sently he commanded it should be demolished. The Case then is plaine. Hee, and they, who abhorred, and uterly destroyed that Idoll, assoone as they knew it not to be God, were there∣fore, before that, habitually in their hearts resolved not to ho∣nour it, if they could have beene perswaded it had not beene a God. In such just Equipage do these your Romish, and those [ 40] Heathenish walke together, that from these your owne Pre∣mises, you may take your Conclusion out of the mouth of your owne Archbishop, whom you have heard affirme, that* 1.181 If in the worship of this Sacrament (saith hee) wee may be deceived, in mistaking Bread, instead of Christ; then is this worship as meerly Idolatrous, as was that of the Heathen. So hee. Which sheweth your Cause and theirs, in these Respects, to be all one. Wee proceed a step further.

That the Romish Worship of that, which may possibly be Bread, may seeme to be in one respect worse than almost the worst of the Pagans. SECT. II.

ALthough the very Title of this Section may seeme unto you fully odious, yet let Truth (in what apparrell soever it [ 10] shall appeare) be gracious unto you. Costerus is a Iesuite much privileged by your Church, who doubted not to affirme, that a 1.182 If Christ be not in this Sacrament, but Bread onely, the Errour (saith hee) is more intolerable than was the Errour of the Heathen, in worshipping either a golden Statue, or a Red Clout. So hee. What reason hee had to speake so broad Language, wee referre to your Inquisitors, to question him for it. But what Cause wee have for the confirming our Title of this Section, wee shall not forbeare to impart unto you. It is the profession of your Church to Adore that which may be Bread in the Eucharist with Divine [ 20] Worship, notwithstanding whatsoever Vncertainty of the pre∣sence of Christ therein, by reason of (as your Iesuite Suarez * 1.183 speakes) almost infinite Defects, which may possibly happen to cause the same. Contrariwise the Heathen Idolaters, tou∣ching the things which they worshipped,* 1.184 Credebant (said your Iesuite) They believed them certainly to have beene Gods. For although some Heathen would sometime make some doubt of a [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] or, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] what, or who the God was, whom they did a∣dore, as they that said, Sive tu Deus es, sive tu Dea es; Whether thou be God or Goddesse; And the Athenians had an* 1.185 Altar 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, To an unknowne God, yet hardly shall you ever find [ 30] any Example of the Heathen, doubting [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Whether it were a God, which they worshipped as God; those of Calecute, and such like Devillish Nations excepted, who are said knowingly to have Adored Devils, but (as some people sometime do homage to Tyrannous Vsurpers, knowing them not to be their lawfull Soveraignes) onely Nè noceant, for feare of hurt.

So abominable is your Masse-worship, being both contrary to expresse Scripture, which exacteth of every man* 1.186 That cometh to God, that hee must believe, what? [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] If hee be? no, but [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] That hee is God; and also against the light of [ 40] grace in all Christians, before the darknesse of Popery began; yea and against the light of nature in the very Pagans. For al∣though you do but seeme to symbolize with them in that one part of Idolatry, thus described by the Prophet;* 1.187 Hee taketh wood, burneth it, maketh Bread, and of a part thereof maketh a God, and falling downe before it, prayeth, Deliver mee, for thou art my God: (Like as is the taking a lumpe of Dough, baking it, and

with part of it to feed our Bodies, of another part to make a God, worship it, and invocate upon it, according to your owne vul∣gar Rimes: Non est Panis, sed est Deus, Homo liberator meus: fit cibus ex pane, caro Deus ex elemento: Qui me creavit sine me, creatur mediante me;) yet notwithstanding do you farre excede them, by adoring onely in an Habituall Condition, If the thing be God, which you worship; Therefore shall they be your Iudges. [ 10]

CHAP. IX.

Our Examination of the Reverence professed by Pro∣testants, and the Securitie of their Profession therein; First, defining and distinguishing the Properties of Reverence. SECT. I. [ 20]

REverence is a due Respect had unto things or per∣sons, according to the good qualities that are in them. This is either inward, or outward. The inward is that our Estimation of them, accor∣ding to their Conditions and Properties: the outward is our open Expression of our said Estimation, whe∣ther by words or Acts. First of the inward Estimation, whether Naturall, Politicke, Religious, or Divine. Children (for Ex∣ample [ 30] sake) are taught by Scripture to honour their Parents, Wives their Husbands, Husbands their Wives, Subjects their So∣veraignes, People their Pastors; And all, above all, to honour God. Our outward Manifestation of these, be it either in word, or deed, or Gesture, is to be discerned and distinguished by the Inward, as the honour to Parents to be called Naturall; of Sub∣jects to Governours, Politique; of People to their Pastors, Religi∣ous; of All to God, Divine, which is transcendently Reli∣gious, and Spirituall. And the Outward is common to each Degree; three onely outward Acts excepted, Sacrificing, Vow∣ing [ 40] unto, and Swearing by: Homages appropriated to the Ma∣jestie of God; Sacrifice to betoken his Soveraignty; Vowing to testifie his Providence; and Swearing for the acknowledg∣ing of his Wisedome in discerning, Iustice in condemning, and Omnipotencie in revenging all Perjury, be it never so secret.

That the Reverence used by Protestants, in receiving this Sa∣crament, is Christianly Religious. SECT. II.

THeir Inward, is their religious Estimation of this Sacrament, [ 10] in accounting the Consecrated Elements to be in them∣selves Symbols and Signes of the precious Body and Blood of Christ, a Memoriall of his death, which is the price of mans Redemption, and to the Faithfull a Token of their spirituall Vnion with all the Members of Christ; and by the incorporation of them, in their flesh, a Pledge of their Resurrection unto life.

Secondly, their outward Application, for testifying their in∣ward estimation, consisteth not essentially in any one peculiar Gesture in it selfe, as you willa 1.188 confesse from Antiquity, whe∣ther it be in Standing, Bowing, Kneeling, or the like; even be∣cause [ 20] the Gestures of Vncovering, Bowing, and Kneeling, are outward behaviours communicable to other persons besides God, according to their Naturall, Morall, Politike, and Religious respects. Howbeit, any of these outward Gestures, which car∣ry in them a greater respect of Reverence, may be injoyned by the Church (whereunto obedience is due) according to the just occasions inducing thereunto. And where there is no such ne∣cessary occasion, there the publike observation of the Rites of Communicating, commanded by Christ in his first Institution, performed (namely) by Supplications, and Praises, is a plaine [ 30] profession of Reverence; and more especially that Invitation, used in most Churches Christian, of the Priest to the People, Lift up your hearts; and their answerable Conclamation, Wee lift them up unto the Lord.

It will be objected by Some, who pretend to have some Pa∣tronage from Calvin, that Kneeling at the receiving of the Com∣munion is Vnlawful. Every such One is to be intreated to be bet∣ter acquainted with Calvin, where, speaking of the Reverence of kneeling, hee saith,b 1.189 It is lawfull, if it be directed not to the Signe, but to Christ himselfe in Heaven; which is the resolute [ 40] profession of our English Church, in the use of this Gesture. {fleur-de-lys} And the use of Bowing towards the Lords Table hath in it no other nature or meaning than Daniel his Kneeling with his face towards Ierusalem and the Temple. For as this was a Testification of his joynt-Society, in that reli∣gious worship, which had beene exercised in the Temple and Altar thereof at Hierusalem: so ours is a Symbol of our uni∣on in profession with them, who do faithfully Communicate at the Table of the Lord. {fleur-de-lys} But to returne unto you, who thinke it no Reverence, which is not given by Divine Adoration

of this Sacrament, wee aske, Do not you use the Sacrament of Baptisme Reverently? you do, yet do you not adore the water with that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] which you yield unto the Eucharist. All this notwithstanding, Calvin his estimation of this Sacrament see∣meth but prophane to many of you: but the Reason is, you would rather condemne him, than judge him, lest that his Do∣ctrine, if it come to examination, might condemne you. For al∣beit hee abhorre your Divine Adoration of the Host, yet doth he alsoc 1.190 condemne every Prophane man, who shall partake there∣of in the state of Impenitencie, To be guilty of the Body and Blood [ 10] of Christ. Your next Question will be, after this our Discovery of the manifold Perplexities, wherein you, by your Romish Doctrine, are so miserably plunged, how Protestants can avoid, in many of them, the like Intanglements.

That Protestants, in their Profession and Practice, stand secure from the first two Romish Perplexities, in respect of Prepara∣tion of the Elements, and undue Pronunciation of the words of Consecration. [ 20] SECT. III.

OVr Church commandeth that the best Bread and Wine be provided for this best of Banquets, the Supper of our Lord; yet doth it beleeve, that Christ the Ordainer thereof will not deprive the soules of his guests of their desired spirituall Bles∣sings, for the negligence of his steward, in being defective to [ 30] provide the Materiall Elements, if so be that there be therein (according to Christ his Institution) the substance of Bread and Wine. As for Pronunciation, you know, Protestants make their Celebration in a tongue knowen unto all the people communi∣cating, and in a loud voice, according to the universall Practice of the Church of Christ in primitive times, as* 1.191 hath beene confessed. So that the Peoples eares may be their owne wit∣nesses, whether the words of Consecration, either by Prayer, or together with the forme of Repetition of the words of Institu∣tion, be truly delivered: which freeth them from your Ro∣mish [ 40] perplexity of not knowing whether the Priest hath truly Consecrated, by his muttering of the words in an unaudible voice.

The Protestants Security, in respect of the third Romish Perplexity, of Adoring in a Morall Certaintie. SECT. IV.

OVr Profession is to adore Christ with an infallible faith, and not with a conjecturall Credulity, or Probability, as wee are taught by the holy Scripture, the Canonicall founda∣tion [ 10] of Christian faith; defining Faith to be an* 1.192 Evidence of things not seene; namely, a more infallible apprehension of the minde, than any perception of sight can be; a faith requi∣red of every one, which shall approach in supplication to God: * 1.193 Hee that cometh to God must beleeve that God is. Infallible faith then must usher Prayer, yea and preaching also any funda∣mentall doctrine of beleefe, as it is written,* 1.194 I beleeved, there∣fore I spake. Yea, without divine Faith, it is impossible to use any religious Invocation:* 1.195 How shall they invocate on whom [ 20] they have not beleeved? So incredible and faithlesse is your Ro∣mish Conjecturall Faith of your worshipping, and Invocating Christ on the Earthly Altar, whereas according to our Chri∣stian Creed of his sitting at the right hand of God in Heaven) wee, because faithfully, do* 1.196 Catholikely, and comfortably adore him, where hee infallibly is upon his Throne of Majestie in Heaven.

That the Protestants stand secure, in respect of the Fourth Romish Perplexity, by defect in the [ 30] Priestly Intention. SECT. V.

FOr the necessity of the Priests due Intention, in consecrating, youra 1.197 Cardinall allegeth the Authority, addeth the consent of your Doctors, (except Catharinus) produceth the opinion of Luther, and Calvin (condemning this Romish Do∣ctrine) [ 40] and condemneth their Censure as Hereticall. But wee permit it to your discrete Iudgements, whether to yeeld to this ostentative ••lourish of your Cardinall, or to the exact and

accurate discourse of yourb 1.198 Jesuite Salmeron, to the con∣trary; grounded upon sound Reasons, (among others, this) that this Perplexitie, and doubt, whether the Priest hath a Due intention in consecrating, worketh to the tormenting of mens Consciences, injury to Gods exceeding bounty and goodnesse, con∣trary to the Iudgement of Antiquity, and in speciall, against that of Saint Augustine; Saepè mihi ignota est Conscientia aliena, sed semper certus sum de divina misericordia. And lastly, because of the Affinity, which it hath with the heresie of the Donatists. So hee.

All which turneth to the condemnation of your Doctrine [ 10] (teaching a necessary Priestly intention) of Noveltie, Impietie, and relish of Heresie. Wee adde to this that saying of the Apostle,* 1.199 If the word be preached, whether of envie, and vaine glory, or of good will, I rejoyce, and will rejoyce; which proveth that the evill Intention of the Messenger cannot impeach the Benefit of the message of Salvation, and embassage of God. Now there is the like Reason of the word visible (which is the Sacrament) as there is of the Audible. Take unto you a Simili∣tude, in the marginall Testimony of your Iesuite Salmeron, of a Notary publicke making a true Instrument, according to the [ 20] forme of Court, in the time when he was distracted in his wits; neverthelesse the same Instrument is of use, and for the benefit of the partie who hath it, not through the Intention of the Scribe, but by the will of the Ordainer, and willingnesse and consent of the Receiver.

Our fifth Securitie from your Romish Perplexitie, touching Ordination. SECT. VI.

TO passe over matters not controverted betweene us, whe∣ther [ 40] the Minister that consecrateth this Sacrament ought to be consecrated by Ecclesiasticall Ordination to this Function (a matter agreed upon on both sides) the onely question is, if hee that ministreth happen to be an Intruder, and no consecra∣ted Minister, whether this his Defect do so nullifie his Conse∣cration of the Eucharist, that it becometh altogether unpro∣fitable to the devout Communicant. Your Church in this case

sendeth you to inquire after the Godfathers, Godmothers, Priest, or Midwife that baptizeth, to know whether hee have beene rightly baptized; and this not satisfying, shee will have you seeke forth the Bishop, by whom hee was ordained, and so to the Odainer of that Bishop, and so to speere further, and fur∣ther, untill you come to Saint Peter, to see whether each of these were rightly consecrated a Priest, and then to search into so many Church-bookes, to know the Baptisme of each one, without which the Act of this Priest now consecrating is fru∣strate, [ 10] and your Adoration Idolatrous. Contrariwise wee, in such an indeprehensible Case, (observe that wee speake of an extraordinary Case) wherein the Actor or Act hath no apparent Defect, are no way scrupulous, knowing that things do worke Ad modum Recipientis: as you have heard in the Ex∣ample of preaching the word of God, were it by Iudas, or if you will a transformed Devill, yet the seed being Gods, it may be fruitfull, (whatsoever the Seed-man be) if the ground that receiveth it be capable. Therefore here might wee take occa∣sion to compare the Ordination Romish and English; and to [ 20] shew ours, so farre as it consenteth with yours, to be the same; and wherein it differeth to be farre more justifiable than yours can be, if it were lawfull, upon so long travelling, to transgresse by wandring into by-pathes.

Our last Securitie from the Romish Perplexity of Habituall Condition. SECT. VII.

HAbituall or virtuall Condition (as it is conceived by your Professors) standeth thus; I adore this which is in the hands [ 30] of the Priest, as Christ, if it be Christ; being otherwise not ••il∣ling so to do, if it be not Christ. What my Masters, Iffs, and Ands in divine worship? These can be no better in your Church than leakes in a ship, threatning a certaine perishing, if they be not stopped; which hitherto none of your best Artificers were ever able to do.

For as touching your profane Lecturerc 1.200 Suarez, labou∣ring to perswade you to Adore Christ in the Eucharist simply, without all scrupulizing, saying, It is not fit to feare where no feare [ 40] is; When as hee himselfe (as you have heard) hath told us that there are possibly incident* 1.201 Almost Infinite Defects, and conse∣quently as many Causes of doubting, which may disannull the {fleur-de-lys}whole Act of Consecration: {fleur-de-lys} Every Morall Certaintie (as your otheri 1.202 Iesuit, and you all confesse) being but conjecturall. {fleur-de-lys}

Therefore there needeth none other Confutation, than this, of his owne shamelesse Contradiction, which (as you may see) is palpably grosse. So impossible it is for any of you to allay the detestable stench of plaine Idolatry. Certainely, if S. Augustine had heard that a Worship of Latria (which hee every-where teacheth to be proper to God) were performed to Bread and Wine, as the matter of Divine Adoration, hee neither would, nor could have said, in defence thereof, as hee did of the Celebra∣tion of the Eucharist in his owne time, viz.d 1.203 Wee are farre from your Paganish worshipping of Ceres and Bacchus. [ 10]

But as for us Protestants, wee professe no Divine worship of God, but with a Divine, that is, an Infallible Faith, that {inverted ⁂} it is God, whom wee worship; who will not be worshipped, but in spirit and truth. What furthermore wee have to say against your Romish Masse, will be discovered in the Booke following. [ 20] [ 30] [ 40]

Notes

• a 1.1

  Concil. Trid. Cultum Latriae; qui vero Deo debetur, in veneratione huic Sa∣cramento exhibeant. Sess. 13. cap. 5.
• b 1.2

  Si quis dixerit in hoc Sacramento unigenitum Dei filiū cultu Latriae non esse adorandum, Anathe∣ma sit. Ibid. Can. 6.
• c 1.3

  Suarez Ies. A∣doratione Latriae ab∣solutà, & perfectâ, quâ per se adoratur Christus—Non so∣lùm Christū sub spe∣ciebus, sed totum vi∣sibile Sacramentum unico Latriae cultu, quia est unum con∣stans ex Christo & speciebus—sicut ve∣stis—Magna est differentia inter has species & crucē, quae reipsa disjuncta est à Christo. In 3. Tho. q. 79. Disput. 65. §. 1. & 2.
• d 1.4

  Missale Rom. Sacerdos prolatis su∣is verbis [Hoc est corpus meum, &c.] hostiam elevat, eam∣que adorat—ado∣randamque ostendit—post genu flexo ad terram usque ip∣sam veneratur. Ritus celebrandi Missam. Post genuflectu, in∣clinatur Sacramento pectus ter percutiens, dicit, Agnus Dei qui tollis peccata mundi miserere nobis, &c. Canon. Missae.
• 1 1.5

  Cornel. Loos Calli••ius Duel. Fid. & Rat. in sine. Ad∣hibetur Precatio co∣ram venerabili Sa∣cramento Euchari∣stiae, ex Thuribulo aureo Sanctarum Precationum, lib. 2. cap. 7. Catholicâ Fide coram te, Domine Iesu, prostratus, Te sub consecrati Panis specie latentem, sed verè & corporaliter sub eadem existentem, adoro.—Hic igitur Te Deum adoro, quem sub corporis tui praesentia subsistentem credo. Da mihi Domine. Iesu, qui omnis gratiae Fons es.
• e 1.6

  Bellarm. Omnes Idololatriam appellant hujusmodi adorationem. Lib. 4. de Eucharist. cap. 29. §. Porrò.
• f 1.7

  Gregor. Valent. Lutherani nos Idololatras vocant, seu (ut ipsi nugari solent) Artolatras. Lib. 1. de Idololat. cap. 3. §. Sed.
• g 1.8

  Caster Ies. Nec opus erat ut ge∣nu slexo significatio∣nem novam honoris darent, sumentes cor∣pus dominicum, quià eundem habebant praesentem, & corpus suum porrigentem, quem mente semper colebant. Enchir. de Euch. Tit. Adoratio, Answering this Obje∣ction: Apostoli in ul∣tima coena hoc Sa∣cramentum non ado∣rabant.
• * 1.9

  See hereafter Chap. 7. Sect. 2.
• h 1.10

  Bellarm. lib. 4. de Euch. cap. 29. Scriptum est Deut. 6. Dominū tuum ado∣bis, &c. §. His prae∣missis.
• * 1.11

  1 Cor 11.
• a 1.12

  Chrysost. in Homaed Cor. 24. Cum horrore accedamus ad Deum. Ob. Har∣ding, &c. Item Bel∣lar. lib. 2. de Euch. cap. 22. Citatis locis qui∣busdā Chrysostomi, ad haec Adversarij ne{que} respondent, ne∣que respondere pos∣sint: Sienim Angeli ad altare astant capi∣tibus inclinatis, & cū horrore ac tremore vix audent intueri, propter splendorē in∣dé emicantem, quis negare potest aliud i∣bi esse quam panem? Et si angeli adorant, quis homines repre∣hendere potest si a∣dorent? Paulò supe∣rius ex Hom. 41. ad Corin. Accedimus ad agnum illum jacen∣tem, & peccata mun∣di tolentem depre∣cantes: ubi apertissi∣mè dicit vocari agnū jacentem, &c. Et Hom ad Ephes. 3. Hostiam quam Angeli cum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 more suscipiunt.
• * 1.13

  See above B. 3. Cha 4. Sect ••. in the Challenge.
• b 1.14

  Chrys. Orat. in Philogon. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Idem paulò superius.
• c 1.15

  Bellar. lib 2 de Missa, 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 15. § Quin∣to—Omnes Graeci Patres passim vocant terribile Sacrificium, & horroris plenum.
• * 1.16

  See above, Booke 5. Cha. 2. Sect. 4.
• * 1.17

  See above B. 5. Chap 2. Sect 3
• * 1.18

  See above B. 6. Chap 5 Sect 8.
• * 1.19

  Ibidem.
• d 1.20

  Durand An∣geli ad••uur semper nobis orantibus. Lib. 7. cap. 12.
• e 1.21

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Orat. 40 de Baptis∣mo
• f 1.22

  August. de meritis & de 〈…〉〈…〉 Christum portantur.
• a 1.23

  Mr. Brerely. Pontificales vestes, & calices coeperunt esse honorandi, Sacra∣menti causâ. Liturg. Tract. 2. §. 8. Subd. 2.
• b 1.24

  August. Epist. 164. Baptismum Christi ubique vene∣ramur.
• c 1.25

  Ribera Ies. in Apoc. 19. Item Vie∣gas Ies. in eundem lo∣cum. Nec nos mo∣veat verbum hoc [A∣dorare] cum vulga∣tum sit hoc creaturis tribui, ut Loth cum vidisset Angelos sur∣rexit, & adoravit eos pronus in terram. 3. Reg. 1. Inclinabat se & adorabat Bersheba Regem prona in ter∣ram. Rectè igitur Io∣hannes adoravit An∣gelum laeta nuncian∣tem; Cur Angelus recusavit? Gregor. Hom. 8. in Evan. An∣gelos antè adventura Christi adoraton, post assumptam hu∣manitatem adorati∣onem recusasse. Eo∣dem modo Glossa, Hugo, Rupertus, & alij nonnulli, &c. So Suarez Tom. 1. Disp. 54. & Bellarm. Hie∣ronymus non igno∣rabat Adorationis multa genera, & ali∣am soli Deo, aliam rebus deberi sacris. Apol. c. 1. § Primū. [And hereckoneth A∣doration of Reliques, Tombes of Martyrs, &c.]
• d 1.26

  Adoro ple∣nitudinem Scriptura∣rum. Adversus Her∣mog. post medium. pag. 350.
• e 1.27

  Greg. Nazian. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Orat. 40.
• f 1.28

  Ambros. lib. 3. de Spirit. sanct. cap. 12. tractans il∣lum locum Psalm. 98. [Adorate Scabellum pedum ejus.] Per Scabellum terra intelligitur, per tertam autem caro Christi, quam hodiè quoque in mysterijs adoramus: & quam Apostoli in Domino Iesu adoraverunt. Ob. 1. per Bellarm. Apol. cap. 8. pag. 107. Hic locus nullam admittit solutionem. Item lib. 2. de Euchar. cap. 14.
• g 1.29

  August. in Psalm. 98. Nemo illam earnem manducat, nisi prius adoraverit. Ob. Bellarm. Alius locus insignis. Lib. 2. de Euchar. cap. 24. §. Alius.
• h 1.30

  〈…〉〈…〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 E∣dit. Paris. 1027.
• 2 1.31

  August. de doctrin Christia lib. 3. cap. 8. 〈…〉〈…〉 intelligit, non hoc veneratur quod videtur & transit, sed illud portius, quô 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cuncta referenda suit—Paulo post; Sicut est 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sacramentum & ce∣libratio Corporis Christi, quae un••s∣quisque cûm percipit quo referantur im∣butus agnoscit, ut ea non cornali servitute, sed spirituali 〈◊〉〈◊〉 libertate ven••••etur.—Vt 〈…〉〈…〉 & sign 〈◊〉〈◊〉 significatis 〈…〉〈…〉.
• * 1.32

  See above Booke 5. Chap. 6. Sect. 3.
• a 1.33

  August. in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 98. Non hoc corpus quod videris munducaturi estis—spiritual ter intelle∣ctum vivisic wit.
• * 1.34

  See 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Chap. 4. Sect. 2.
• 3 1.35

  Dr. Heskins in his Parlium Booke 3. Chap. 57 out of Ambrose. Devoto animi & cum timore acceden∣dum ad Communionem docet, ut sciat mens reverentiam debere ei, ad cujus corpus ••umendum accedit.
• b 1.36

  Theod. Dial. 2. Signa mystica post sanctificationem ma∣nent in priore sub∣stantiâ, figurâ, & formâ, sicut prius: Intelliguntur autem ea, quae facta sunt, & creduntur: [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] adoran∣tur. Ob: Bellarm. lib. 2. de Euchar. cap. 27. § Sed apertissimè—As••••••t praesentiam Domini in Euchari∣stia, quia panis con∣secratus est verè id quod intelligitur, cre∣ditur & adoratur.
• * 1.37

  See this dis∣cussed to the full. Booke 3.
• a 1.38

  Bellar. lib. 2. de Euch. cap. 2. ciiat Au∣gustin Serm. 10. de verbis Apostol. viz. Quod corpus dixit es∣cam, & sanguinem potum, Sacramentum fidelium agnoscunt fideles—Be hanc phrasin [nôrunt fide∣les] habet in locis in∣finitis: at profectò non est fidelibus tan∣tùm notum, quòd corpus Christi fide percipiatur. Idem. Ob∣jicit Claudius de San∣ctes ante lib. de Litur∣gijs patrum. Rursus Bellar qui sup. cap. 15. At certè nulla reddi potest causa, cur Eu∣charistiam ne videri quidem permitterent Infidelibus, vel etiam Catechumenis, si ni∣hil est nisi signum.
• 1 1.39

  Mr. M••llon in his Reply, pag 221.
• b 1.40

  Chrysost. in Gal. 4. Non natura, sed Dei promissio Sacra∣mentum fecit: sic re∣nascentia nostra na∣tura quidem nulla est, caeterum verbum Dei, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• c 1.41

  And againe in 1. Cor. Hom. 40. about to entreat of the words of S. Paul, [Quid fa∣cientij, qui baptizan∣tur pro mortuis? [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 {fleur-de-lys} And yet againe, in Ioh. 85. Hom. 33. joy∣ning that Contempla∣tion of Baptisme and of the Eucharist to∣gether, hee saith; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. id est, Initi∣ati. {fleur-de-lys}
• 2 1.42

  Basil. de Spir. Sanct. Cap. 27. Con∣secrare oleum uncti∣onis, hominem ter mergi, renuntiare Sa∣tanae, & reliqua eti∣am in Baptismo, un∣de habemus? nonnè ex antiqua traditio∣ne? nonnè ex doctri∣na, quam Patres in silentio, quod curio∣sos & otiosos sub∣movet, servârunt?
• d 1.43

  Dionys. Hierar. cap. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• e 1.44

  Con••. Arau••••••n. 1. Catechumeni non sunt ad Baptismum admittendi. Can. 19.
• f 1.45

  Aug. Tom. 9. Tract. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in Ioh. Quid si eis fidelium Sacramenta non producuntur, non ideo fit, quod ea ferre non possent, sed ut ab 〈◊〉〈◊〉 tan∣tò ardentiùs concupiscantur, quantò honorabilius eis occultantur. [Speaking of the Catechumenists.]
• * 1.46

  Suarez. See above Book 6. Ch. 1. Sect. 5. at (a.)
• a 1.47

  Durant. de Ritib. lib. ••. cap. 23 num. 7 In ordine Romano Diaconus osculans E∣vangelium, levat in manus codscem, & partem ejus in dex∣tro humero ponens, vadit ad Ambonem.
• b 1.48

  Idem de Ritibus l. 2. cap. 40. in Psal 71. In capite montium: hoc est (ait Rabbi Io∣nathan) Sacrificium in capitibus Sacerdo∣tum. Durand. Ratio∣nal. lib. 4. cap. 42 num. 54. Elevatu••. ut populus congreslus consecrationem fa∣ctam esse, & Chri∣stum super Altare ve∣nisse reverenter pro∣sternatur in terram, & illum ore adóret. Et Durant. quo supr. Adorationis ergo Eu∣charistiam in altum attolli, Durandus & Ivo asserunt, Proba∣bile est.
• * 1.49

  See above, B. 3.
• * 1.50

  See above, B. 6. Chap. 4. Sect. 5.
• c 1.51

  Missals published by Claudius Sanctes a Parisian Doctor, be∣fore Consecration, in the Missal of S. Iames, Attollens: In the Masse of Basil. Exal∣tans panem.
• * 1.52

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.
• d 1.53

  After Consecration in the Masse of Chry∣sostome. Modicum at∣tollens Sacerdos, di∣cit Sancta sanctis.
• e 1.54

  In Dionys. Areop∣relating the forme of their Mosse, objected by Durantus de Ritib. lib. 2. cap. 40. Mysteria, quae ante laudaverat Sacerdos, venerandis operta 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in conspectum agit, divi∣naque munera reverenter ostendens, ad sacram Communionem convertitur. Wherein there is no one word of, Venerandis, or Reverenter, but this.] 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Dionys. Areopag. cap. 3.
• 3 1.55

  Barthol. Gavant. Com. in Rubr. Missae. Tunc se erigens Sacerdos, quan•••••• commode potest, in altum elevat, & intentus in eum oculis, populo reverenter ostendit adorandum—Rubrica Missae: [Sacerdos genufle∣ctens reverenter adoret, & calicem disco opertam cum sanguine elevet, & erectum quantum potest ostendet po∣pulo adorandum.] Hinc Author, Non autem sub praecepto haec Blevatio calicis ante Sanct. Thomam, ex So∣to in 4. Dist. 13. Quaest. 2. Art. 5. Vnde neque Thomas meminit illius, ubi minute omnes ritus Missae ponit. part. 2. Tit. 8. pag. 108.
• 4 1.56

  Cassand. in Li∣turg. cap. 11. Sacer∣dos sublevet, Id ip∣sum quoque facit in Calice, sed non ele∣vat.
• f 1.57

  Tertull. in lib. de Corona milit. Ca∣licis aut panis aliquid in terram discuti, an∣xiè pa••mur. Ob. by Mr. Brerely, Lit••••g. Tract 2. Sect. 8. Sub. 4. pag. 286. And out of Origen. Hom. 5. in Levit. Take heed no little crumme fall to the ground. Tract. 4. Sect. ••. And, Pius Bishop of Rome or∣dained that the con¦se••rated Bread and Wine falling to the ground should be left to the Sacrificer, and the rest remaining should be burnt with fire unto ashes. So great a Reverence was then prescribed. Ibid. Tract. 2. Sect 8. Subd 4. {fleur-de-lys} Bell. li. 2. de Euch. ca 7. Tertul. de corona milit. inter alios Christianos ri∣tus ponit summam cautionem, quam ad∣hibebant Christiani, ne aliquid Euchari∣stiae in terram cade∣ret: Calicis (inquit) aut Panis nostri al∣quid in terram decuti anxiè patimur. {fleur-de-lys}
• * 1.58

  See above, B. 1. Chap 3. Sect. 10. in Answer to the second pretence.
• 5 1.59

  Gabriel Epis••. Albisp. lib. 2. Obser∣vat. 35. in lib. Tert. ad uxorem [Calicis & panis nostrialiquid in terram decuti anxiè patimur.] Pameliusin eum locum. Quod addit (inquit) panis nostri, facit ad distin∣ctionem Bucharistiae Sacramenti, in quo non calix & panis communis proponu••tur. And the Bishop himselfe; Tertul. laudat aetatis suae morem, quo aegrè ferebant si casu communis panis & vini aliquid in terram exciderit.
• 6 1.60

  Hier. ad Rustic. cap. 4. commending the Bp. Exuperius. Nihil de illo dicimus, qui corpus in canistro, & sanguinem portabat in vi∣tro.
• 7 1.61

  De Consec. D. 1. C. Vasa.—Zepherinus Episcopus patenis vitrcis Missas celebrare constituit.
• a 1.62

  Chrysost: in Li∣turg Posteà similiter Sacerdos sumit san∣ctum panem, inclina∣to capite ante sacram mensam orans.
• b 1.63

  Cyril. Hieros. My∣stag. 5. Accede. ad ca∣licem sanguinis illius pronus [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.]
• c 1.64

  Espencaeus. Nec disputatio super Ado∣randi gestu, cum de Adorationis substan∣tia inter omnes sem∣per convenerit, ac etiamnum convenit, stantes aut sedentes, proni aut supini, ere∣cti aut geniculati, Christum in Euchari∣stia praesentissimum adoremus, per se non refert—cùm A∣doratio non tam in externo cultu, quàm intimo mentis affectu cernitur. Lib. 2. de A∣dorat cap. 16. initio.
• * 1.65

  The Latine is, In∣clinantes Altari: but since I finde it in the Greeke (before Conse∣cration) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and so thrice the like. Af∣ter Consecration; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 [Behinde the Table bowing downe his head.] And againe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• d 1.66

  Durant Per∣actâ thurificatione, Sacerdos levite•• incurvescit ante Altare—dum autem inclinat Sacerdos, humilitatem Christi significat.—Sacerdos reflexus ad Altare, cum paratur Consecratio. Lib. 2. de Ritib. cap. 25.
• e 1.67

  Vasquez. Ies. Graec•• Ecclesia antè Consecrationem re∣verenter adorat, etiā si non sit ibi Christus. De Adorat. lib. 2. c. 11. [Falsly commenting that this was Divine honour, and iust.]
• * 1.68

  Gabriel Episc. Albisp. Observat. sacr. lib. 1. Observ. 12.
• f 1.69

  Mr. Brerely Liturg. Tract. 2. §. 9. Subd. 3. [Out of Bel∣larm. and Bellar. out of Antoninus.]—When (not unlike to the reproofe which God miraculously gave to Balaam by the speech of an Asse) a bruit-beast for our instruction did prostrate him∣selfe in reverence be∣fore the blessed Sa∣crament.
• * 1.70

  BANKS HIS HORSE; according to his Masters owne Re∣lation.
• a 1.71

  Greg. Nazian. Orat. 11 de Gorgonia. Soror Gorgonia ad∣versà corporis valetu∣dine laborabat—eratque prodigiosum morbi genus, quod nec medicorum arte, nec parentum lachry∣mis, nec publicis pre∣cibus sanari potuit: desperatis omnibus alijs auxilijs intem∣pestà nocte captatâ ad Altare cum side procumbit, eumque qui super isto hono∣ratur ingenti clamore invocans, cum caput suū part cum clamo∣re Altari admovisset, & deinde hoc phar∣maco (i.e. Lachryma∣rum, ut exponit Elias Cretensis) perfudisset, & si quid uspiam [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Antity∣porū preciosi Corpo∣ris & Sanguinis ma∣nu recondrderat, ad lachrymis admiscurs∣set (ô rem admiran∣dam!) statim se mor∣bo liberatam sentit.
• b 1.72

  Bellar. Procum∣bens ante Altare co∣rā venerabili Sacra∣mento—Quid autem super altare colatur, dubium esse non po∣test, cum nihil ibi po∣natur nisi Panis & Vinum, mutanda in corpus & sanguinem Christi—Petium Martyrē valdè ussit pupugitque hic locus. Lib. 2. de Euch cap 14
• * 1.73

  See above, Book 4. Chap. 1. Sect. 10. As further also appeareth in the Liturgie of pope Clement; Acci∣piant Diacont reli∣quias, & portent in Pastophoria (Doubt∣lesse from the Altar to a place remote.) Teste pamelio Tom 1 Missal. Patrion La∣tin. pag 118.
• * 1.74

  See above, Book 4. Chap. •• Sect. 5.
• 9 1.75

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Orat. 11. quo supra.
• * 1.76

  Booke 2. Chap. 2. Sect. 6.
• c 1.77

  Bellar. Dio∣nys. Areop. Hier. cap. 3. part. 3. O divinis∣simum & sacrosan∣ctum Sacramentum, obducta tibi signifi∣cancium signorum o∣perimenta aperi, &c. Lib. 2. de Euch. cap. 3. Item ipsum invocat Sacramentum, & pe∣tit ab ipso, quae à solo Deo rectè peti pos∣sunt. And, Durant. de Rit ib. lib. 2. cap. 11. Aud indeed who not?
• 10 1.78

  Mallon. Ies. in his Reply.
• d 1.79

  Nazian. Orat. 32. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• e 1.80

  Ambros. in Luc. lib. 10. cap. 22. O aqua, tu aspersum sanguine (Christum) lavisti, Sacramentum Christi esse meruisti, &c.
• f 1.81

  Optat. lib. 6. cont. Parmē. O aqua, quae & purum feceras orbē, & terrā lavisti. Greg. Nyssen. Divinū lavacrum, See above, Booke 3. C. 3. §. 13.
• g 1.82

  O salve Crux, spes unica! auge piis justitiā, &c. Est Pro∣sopopoeia. Vasquez. Ies. lib. 2. de Adorat. Disp. 9. cap. 4. pag. 445.
• h 1.83

  O sacrum cō∣vivium! quod omni Sacramento conve∣nit. Tolet. Ies. Instruct. Sacerd. lib. 2. cap. 15. pag. 366.
• i 1.84

  Pachym. in locum Dionys. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Ex Orat. 42.
• * 1.85

  See above Booke 3. Chap. 3. Sect 13.
• k 1.86

  Basi••i de Spir. sanct. cap. 2•• [Verba Invocationis, cùm o∣stenditur, quis San∣ctorum in scripto no∣bis reliquit?] Hunc habemus morem ve∣teris Ecclesiae, ut post consecrationē osten∣deretur populo Eu∣charistia, quod nunc fieri videmus, & con∣ceptis verbis invoca∣retur. Ob. Bellar. lib. 2 de Euch. cap. 25 §. Al∣terum. And Durant. de Ritib. lib 2. cap. 11. Planè ab ipsis Eccle∣siae incunabilis post Consecrationem Eu∣charistiam in altum tollere, Dionys. & Ba∣sil. de Spiritu Sancto, cap. 27, &c.
• * 1.87

  Broved above, Book 1. Ch. 2. Sect. 3. in the Challenge.
• l 1.88

  Archiep. Caesari∣ens. seu Christoph. de Capite fontium, Tra∣ctat. var. Sacerdos in∣vocando Deum panē consecravit: Hanc a∣lij, ut Tertull. Iren. Iustin. Gratiarum a∣ctionē hujusmodi In∣vocationem seu be∣nedictionem vocant. pag. 34. Alicubi The∣odoret Basil. Cyril. Hierosol. Iren. Da∣mascen. Theoph. A∣lex. vocant Euchari∣stiae formam 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Invocationem. Ibid. pag. 33. And hee allegeth your Linda∣nus for a Suffragator in this point.
• * 1.89

  See Booke 1. Chap. 2.
• m 1.90

  Paulus non tradidit formā Con∣secrationis, quod Ba∣silius ità illustrat, ut sano capiti nihil ad haec sit ullo modo re∣quirendum amplius, cap. 42. de Spir. san∣cto; Verba, dùm o∣stenditur panis (in∣quit) & poculum be∣nedictionis, quis San∣ctorū nobis reliquit? Lindan. Panop. lib. 4. cap. 41.
• n 1.91

  Liturg. Iac. [Sancte Domine, &c.]
• o 1.92

  Liturg. Chry∣sost. [Adhuc offeri∣mus—mitte Spiri∣tum, &c.]
• p 1.93

  Liturg. Ba∣sil. [Respice Domi∣ne.]
• 10 1.94

  Cyril. Hiero. sol. Mystag. Catech. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• q 1.95

  Decret. part. 1. cap. 11. Ecclesiasti∣corum. Aug. ex Basi∣lio; Quae scripta no∣bis, quibus verbis sit Consecratio, com∣mendavit?
• r 1.96

  〈…〉〈…〉 Bellar. lib 2. de Euch. cap 8. §. Al∣t••rum.
• * 1.97

  See above B. 5. Chap 5. Sect. 6.
• 11 1.98

  Billius in Orat. 42. Nazianz.
• 12 1.99

  Nicetas in lo∣cum ipsum Nazianz. [O Pascha magnum & sacrum Pascha, &c.] Haec verba Na∣zianzeni ad Festum ipsum perinde ac vitâ praeditum refert.
• * 1.100

  See above a•• [12]
• a 1.101

  Calvin. Instit. lib. 2. c. 17. §. 36. Nec alia cau••â in antiqua Ecclesia fuisse insti∣tutum, ut antè myste∣riotum celebrationē diceretur, [Sursùm corda.]
• b 1.102

  In omnibus Li∣turgiis Graecis Iaco∣bi, Basilij, Chrysost. et omnibus Latinis habetur id, quod eti∣am hoc tempore nos facimus. Bellar lib. 1. de Euch. ca. 14. §. Re∣spondeo si.
• c 1.103

  Respondeo [Sursùm corda] non significare elevatio∣nem ad locum cor∣poralem, sed elevati∣onem à rebus terre∣nis & curis hujus vi∣tae, ad Deum & res aeternas. Non re∣spondetur, Habemus ad firmamentum, sed [Habemus ad Do∣minum.] Et certè qui Christum quaere∣bant in praesepi, in templo, in sepulchro, Sursùm corda habe∣bant, quia illum quae∣rebant, qui est super omnia, Deus benedi∣ctus in secula.—Et fieri potest ut qui terram intuetur, cor deor um—Sic qui in Eucharistia Chri∣stum quaerunt & ve∣nerantur, cor sursum habent, si de ipso Christo, non de ne∣gotiis hujus vitae in∣terim cogitent. Bel∣larm. Ibid.
• * 1.104

  Liturg. Graec. [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.]
• d 1.105

  Monet ergo Sacerdos populum [Sursùm] i. e. super seipsum elevare cor∣da ad Dominum, ju∣xtà exhortationem Apostoli, Col. 3. Quae sursùm sunt quaerite, non quae super ter∣ram. Durand. Ration. lib. 4. cap. 33.
• e 1.106

  Aug. in Psal. 148. [Laudate Do∣minum in excelsis.] Primò de coelo dicit, posteà de terris: lau∣datur enim Deus, qui fecit coelum & ter∣ram. Nos adhuc in imo sumus, sed cum cogitamus quomodo illic laudetur Deus, cor ibi habeamus: & non sine causa au∣dimus [Sursùm corda.]
• * 1.107

  See above, Booke 6. Chap. 3. Sect. 8. &c.
• * 1.108

  Ibid.
• * 1.109

  Booke 4. Chap. 11. Sect. 4.
• * 1.110

  Booke 5. Chap. 5. Sect. ••.
• * 1.111

  Aug. See above B. 5. Ch. 3. Sect. 1.
• f 1.112

  Cyril. Hier. Catech. Mystag. 5. Ob hanc causam clamat Sacerdos [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] quià oportet sursùm habere cor, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, & non ad terrena negotia deprimere. Paulò post, 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• g 1.113

  Aug. in Psal. 85. Certè rectè admonet ut Sursùm corda habeant: audiant igitur & faciant, levent ad coelum quod malè est in terrati••i enim non putrescit cor, si levetur ad Deum. Teste Pamel. Tom. 1. Missal. in Missa Aug. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. pag. 527.
• * 1.114

  See above, B. 6. Chap. 3. Sect. 8.
• 1 1.115

  Dr. Heskins Parliam. Booke 2. Ch. 53. out of Hier. E∣pist ad Hebdib. qu. 2.
• 2 1.116

  Hier ad Heb∣dib cap. 2. Ascenda∣mus igitur cum Do∣mino ad coenaculum magnum, stratum, & accip••amus ab eo sur∣sum Cal••cem Novi Testamenti: Ibique cùm eo Pascha cele∣brantes, inebriemur ab eo Vino sobrieta∣tis.
• h 1.117

  Tempore ve∣ters Ecclesiae Ro∣manae populus non cursitabat ad viden∣dum id quod Sacer∣dos ostendit, sed pro∣stratis humi corpori∣bus, animis in coelum erectis, gratias age∣bant Redemptori. E∣ras. lib. de amab. Ec∣cles. Concord.
• i 1.118

  Ambros. in Luc. cap. 24. Maria, quae quaerebat Christum in terra, ••angere non potuit: Stephanus te∣tigit, qui quaesivit in coelo.
• k 1.119

  Aug Tom. 2 Epist. 44. ad Maxim. Christianis Catholi∣cis nihil ut numen a∣doratur, quod con∣ditum est a Deo. Idē Tom. 8. in Psalm. 98. Timeo terram ado∣rare, ne me damnet qui fecit coelum & terram. Nazianz. O∣rat 31. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.120

  See Booke 8. Chap. 1. Sect. 3.
• a 1.121

  Missal. Rom. pag. 31. Vbi debita materia deficit, non conficitur Sacramen∣tum.—Si non sit panis triticeus, vel si alioqui corruptus. Et pag. 32. Si Vinum sit factum acetum, vel penitùs putidum, vel de uvis acerbis & non maturis expressum, vel admixtum aquae, ut sit corruptum, non conficitur Sacramentum.
• b 1.122

  Dico, species consecratae perfectè misceri possunt cum liquore specie distin∣cto, & tum non manet sub eis sanguis Christi. Ità Thomas. Teste Suar. Ies. in 3. Thom. Disp. 67 Sect. 4. § Dico. Et Durand. Si plus apponatur Aquae quàm Vini, erit irritum Sacramentum. Lib. 4. cap. 42.
• c 1.123

  Missal. Ro∣man in Can. Miss••e. Sex modis continge∣re potest formae va∣riatio (nun••rùm) per Additionem, de∣tractionem, alicujus vocis mutationem, vel si una pon••tur lo∣co alterius, corrupti∣onem vocis alicujus, detrahendo, vel mu∣tando syllabam ali∣quam, transpositio∣nē, id est, ordinis di∣ctionum variatione, ac deinde per inter∣ruptionem, ut pro∣nunciando unā par∣tem formae, ac quic∣scendo per aliquod spacium, vel loquen∣do aliquid imperti∣nens. Minima vari∣atio destruit integri∣tatem substantialem, si pereat sensus. Bel∣larm. lib. 1. de Sacra∣ment. in Gen. cap. 21. §. Secunda Prop.—Sacramenta rata non sunt, si dum confe∣runtur unum tantùm verbum, quod ad substantiam pertinet, omittatur: imò si u∣nius syllabae omissio sensum verborum mutaverit, aut corru∣perit, collatum Sa∣cramentum non va∣let: ut si Sacerdos dixerit, Hoc est Cor meum, pro [Cor∣pus meum.] Azor. Ies. Institut. Moral. Tom. 1. lib. 5. cap. 28 §. Animadvert.—[Hoc est, &c.] Si quis diminueret ali∣quid, aut immutaret de forma Cōsecratio∣nis, vel aliquid addat, quod significationem mutaret, non consiceret Sacramentum. Missal. Rom. pag. 33. Haec sunt necessaria necessitate Sacramenti, quibus sublatis, tollitur Sacramentum, ut nimirum non peccet Sacerdos corrumpendo verba Consecrationis. Item Alan. de Sacram. in Gen. cap. 21.
• d 1.124

  Agrippa. Sicut narratur de Sacrificulo, sivè verum, sivè fabula sit, qui cùm plures haberet Hostias, ne Grammaticam omitteret, in haec verba consecravit, Haec sunt corpora mea. De vanit. Scient. cap. 3.
• c 1.125

  Bellarm. Si Sacerdos fingit se consecrare, cum non consecrat, Christus abest.—Nisi intentio Ministri fit ••altem virtualis, a∣nimo faciendi quod facit Ecclesia, non est Consecratio. De Sa∣cram. in Gen. cap. 27. Si quis non intendit conficere, nisi delu∣soriè aliquid agere. Missal. Rom. Pag. 33.—Vel ex obli∣vione, cùm hostia a∣liqua lateat, cùm non intendit consecrare nisi quas videt. Vel si habens coram se vndecim hostias, & intendat consecrare decem, non determinans quas decem intendit, non consecrat, quia requiritur Intentio. Missal. Ibid.
• a 1.126

  Decret. li. 13. tit. 43. cap. 3. Vehiens ad gradum Sacerdotij comperit tandē quod non sit baptizatus, ri∣tè fecimus ipsum baptizari.
• b 1.127

  Bellarm. Vel una litera. De Sa∣cram. in Gen. cap. 25. §. Secunda Prop.—Haec sunt necessaria necessitate Sacra∣menti, ut nimirùm non peccet Sacerdos corrumpendo verba Consecrationis: ut in Baptismo si quis dicat, Baptizo te in nomine Matris, &c. Alan. Card de Sacrā. in Gen. cap. 21. And Azorius, See above, Sect. 2. lit. (c)
• c 1.128

  M. Fox his Acts and Monum. pag. 1969.
• d 1.129

  Cosmus Philiarch. de offic. Sacerd. Tom. 1. lib. 1. cap. 14. Potest dari casus, sicut audivi datum esse, quòd filius alicujus nobilis sit à leva∣trice baptizatus aquà ••osaccâ, quia est filius nobilis, &c.
• * 1.130

  See (as before) so also in the next Sect. at the letter (a).
• 1 1.131

  Bellarm. lib. 4. de Euchar. cap. 16. §. At—Semper in Ecclesia pro indubi∣tato habitum est, ità necessariam esse ordinationem Sacerdotalem, ad Eucharistiam conficiendam, ut sinè eo confici nullo modo possit. Et lib. 1. de Sacrom. in Gen. cap. 21. Verba Sacramentorum determinata sunt, ut non liceat quicquid immutare, &c.
• a 1.132

  Si deficit or∣do Sacerdotalis in consiciente, non con∣ficitur Sacramentum. Missal. Roman. pag. 31.
• b 1.133

  Multae sunt causae propter quas potest accidere, ut Christus non sit prae∣sens: ut si Sacer∣dos non sit Bapti∣zatus, vel non fit ri∣tè ordinatus, quod pendet ex multis aliis Causis, quibus ferè in infinitum progre∣di possumus; ut ex parte materiae saepè accidit defectus. Sua∣rez. Ies. in. Thom. quaest. 79. Art. 8. Disp. 65. §. 2.
• c 1.134

  Plena sunt illa tempora Ordina∣tionibus Paparum, Exordinationibus, Superordinationibus. Baron. Ann. 908. num. 3. & Ann. 897. num. 6, & 8. & Ann. 900. num. 6. Platina in vita Ioh. 10. fol. 146 & in vita Sergij 3. fol. 148.
• d 1.135

  Platina in vi∣ta Steph. 6. de Formo∣so; Abscissis duobus dextrae illius digitis, potissimum eis, qui∣bus Sacerdotes in Consecratione utun∣tur.
• 2 1.136

  Non diù est quòd Episcopus, ad∣huc in Gallia, plus∣quam duo Prebyte∣rorum millia conse∣cràrat, quorum omnium Ordinationes nullae judicabantur: attamen isti decem vel duo decim annos celebrave∣rant. Quâ igitur fide adorata fuit Hostia ab iis elevata? Teste Riveto nostro Sum Controv. Tract. 3. qu. 25.
• a 1.137

  Bellar. Vbi de∣est vera Consecratio, nullum est periculum in eo, qui bonâ side Sacramētum adorat, adoratio enim potis∣simum ex intentione pendet: quare sicut is, qui panem non con∣secratum injuriâ assi∣ceret, putans conse∣cratum esse, gravissi∣mè peccâsset in Chri∣stum: sicetiam con∣tra qui panem eun∣dem adorat, quòd certo credat non este panem, sed Christū, is propriè & formali∣ter Christum adorat, non panem. Lib. 4 de Euchar. cap. 30. Vbi quis simpliciter ado∣rans Sacramentū non consecratum est actus Latriae, & actus mo∣raliter bonus, proce∣dens ex motivo ho∣nesto.—Sicut quan∣do quis dat Eleemo∣synam homini petenti nomine Christi, ex misericordia infusa operatur, si prudenter existimaverit illum esse pau∣perem, quamvis speculativè decipi contingat. Suarez. Ies. Tom. 3. qu. 79. Art. 8. Disp. 65. pag. 829. col. 1. Omnis fidelis rectè adorans hostiam consecratam, adorat sub eâ conditione, si perfecta sunt circa ipsam ea, quae ad Con∣secrationem sunt necessaria, secundùm divinam institutionem, & sic nunquam decipitur, neque errat. Bonavent. in. 3. Dist. 24. Art. 1. quaest. ••. ad ult. Teste Suarez quo supra, pag. 828. [And in them, who require it Actuall, albeit Tacitam, Azor. Ies. reckoneth from Gabriel in Can. Missae, Thom. Bonavent. Albert. Richard. yea and Canonistas Theologos, excepting Cajetan. Hassel. Claud. Sainctes, qui simpliciter & sine conditione adoran∣dum monent. Azor. Instit. Tom. 1. lib. 9. cap. 9. §. Decimo.] Dicendum est, quod per se loquendo, ac seclusis specialibus circumstantijs per Accidens occurrentibus, absolutè adorandum esse hoc Sacramentum, nullâ in actu appositâ conditione. Ita sentit D. Thom. in 3. Dist. 9. quaest. 1. Art. 2. q. 6. ad. 2. ubi solùm dicit, non requiri conditionem explicitam, sed satis esse si habitu retineatur: Habitu autem illam retineri, nihil aliud esse vide∣tur, nisi mente & animo habere intentionem adorandi verum Christum, verumque Sacramentum, & non ad∣hibendi adorationem, nisi cum hac pendenti existimatione. In eadem sententia est Richardus, ubi (inquit) licet fides credit Christum esse sub speciebus, sub conditione si omnia sunt facta, quae ad consecrandum sunt neces∣saria, tamen ad adorandum non oportere, ut fideles hanc conditionem adhibeant in actuali cogitatione. Idem Gabriel. Marsil. & communiter Summistae, verbo, Adoratio. Ità Suarez Tom. 3. quaest. 79. Art. 8. Disp. 6••. pag. 828. col. 2. Nihil obfuit Iacob, cum Laban sibi ignoranti pro Rachel in concubitu substituerit Leam, quia bonâ fide se cum propria uxore dormire putaret. Ita non est Artolatra, qui adorat Christum in pane non con∣secrato, quem bonâ fide putat consecratum, &c. Salmeron Ies. Tom. 9. Tract. 33. pag. 181.
• b 1.138

  [Ego sum Deus tuus fortis zelôtes, Exod. 20. 5.] Dicitur Deus Zelôtes, id est, zelum tenens: zelus autem est amor priva∣tus, nolens habere consortium in amato. Et sic viri dicuntur habere zelum de uxoribus suis, quia volunt quòd uxores suae solos illos ament, & solis illis copulentur. Sic etiam Deus volebat quòd Idaei eam solum colerent, & eum ut Deum cognoscerent: & quando alius colere∣tur ut Deus, dolebat, tanquam si vir videat uxorem suam amantem alium virum. Et sicut cùm mulier alteri quàm viro suo copulatur, fornicari dicitur: ita qui alterum quàm verum Deum colebat, fornicari dicebatur in Scriptura cum Dijs alienis. Abulens. in Exod. 20. pag. 273 col. 2.
• c 1.139

  Graeci optimè interpretantur Hypo∣stasin per substanti∣am, quia fides essicit ut ea, quae credit, non minùs certa habea∣mus, quàm si subsiste∣rent. Ribera Ies. Com. in Heb. 11. pag. 514.
• * 1.140

  Chap. 9. Sect. 4.
• * 1.141

  Septuagiots.
• d 1.142

  Sacerdos incli∣natus Sacramento, junctis manibus, & ter pectus percutiens, dicit, Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis. Et rursus, Agnus Dei, &c. Missal. Rom. pag. 24. Rursus. Inclinato ca∣pite versus Sacramen∣tum, dicit intelligibili voce, Da nobis pa∣cem: Et rursus se∣cretè, Domine Iesu Christe, &c. Missal. Rom. ibid
• * 1.143

  Thorow-out the 7. Chapter.
• * 1.144

  See Chap. 7. thorowout.
• a 1.145

  Bellar. Sicut is, qui panem non consecratum injuriâ afficeret, &c. See a∣bove, Sect. 1. (a).
• b 1.146

  M••la inten∣tio vittat opus: sed perperā inde colligi∣tur opera mala ex in∣tentione bona justi∣ficari. Nam opus bo∣num nascitur ex in∣tegra causâ, malum autem ex quovis de∣fectu oriti potest. Bellar. de amiss. Grat. lib. 2. cap. 4. §. P••••∣mum enim.
• * 1.147

  Chap. 7, and 8.
• 1 1.148

  Incredibile videtur, Deum tanti aestimare amorem, quo eum amo, quanti peccatum, quo eum offendo: quis enim eum, qui Principi fa∣cit injuriam, vel ejus legem violavit, ità ut mereatur mortem, dicat satisfacere ex aequo, si illum amet, & doleat de suo fa∣cto, & promittat e∣mendationem? quis dicat ex natura rei tanti debere aestimare dolorem illum ex a∣more profectū, quanti injuriam, & legis vi∣olationem? nec ju∣re posse Principem injuriam retinere, & pro meritis punire? hoc ipso enim quod quis meritus est amittere vicam & bona sua om∣nia, etiamsi millies amet, millies doleat, & emendationem promittat, censebitur ullo modo aequivalens of∣ferre, quod mereatur condonationem; multò minùs possit homo compensationem Deo reddere. Lessius Ies. Opusc. lib. 13. de Iustic. cap. 27.
• * 1.149

  See above Sect. 1. at the letter (a) ad finem.
• * 1.150

  Ibid.
• * 1.151

  Acts 9. 5.
• * 1.152

  1. Cor. 15 9.
• * 1.153

  2. Tim. 1. 13.
• * 1.154

  Ioh. 16. 2.
• * 1.155

  Prov. 30. 20.
• * 1.156

  Confessed a∣bove, Chap. 5. Sect. 6. by your Iesuit Suarez.
• a 1.157

  Honor est testimonium excel∣lentiae, quod conti∣netur verbo vel facto, quae de excellentia a∣licujus convenientem existimationem illi gignit. Sic honor di∣vinus est quicquid verborum aut offici∣orum omninò accō∣modatum est ad gig∣nendam existimati∣onem hujusmodi, quae in divinam ma∣jestatem propriè con∣veniat. Hoc duplici modo, I. ut opus sit naturâ suâ ità praeclarum, ut quis illud naturali lumine rationis solum Deum tali honore dignum esse judicet, quale est Sacrificium. Alterum, ut tale sit intentione ejus, qui vult de persona, quam honorat, talem existima∣tionem excitare, quae in divinam majestatem conveniat, licet honor iste alioqui indifferens sit. Gregor. Valent. lib. 2. de Idol. cap. 3.
• b 1.158

  Est Idololatria divini cultus erga falsum Deum exhibitio: colere enim pro Deo eum, qui non est Deus, aut ipsum laudando, aut ei aliquo modo prosternendo, Idololattare est.—Idolo∣latria (quae est falsa Adoratio) non est nisi error in intellectu, quo dignum honore judicamus Deum falsum, cui Idololatra se prosternit. Tolet. Ies. Instit. Sacerd. lib. 4. cap. 24. §. Est igitur.
• c 1.159

  Idololatria comprehen∣dit omnem superstiosam religionem, quâ quaelibet res colitur pro Deo. Lorinus Ies. in Acts 17. 16.
• d 1.160

  Nos visibili Sacramento invisibi∣le Corpus Christi praesens, adeoque Christum ipsum in∣vocamus, & quasi divinum quoddam adoramus, & quasi vivum quiddam ra∣tionabile alloqui∣mur, rogamus [O salutaris Hostia, &c.] Espenc. lib. 5. de Ado∣rat. cap. 8. fol. 185 & ibid. lib. 1. cap. 9. fol. 25.
• e 1.161

  Idololatria est, non solùm cum ado∣ratur Idolum, relicto Deo, sed etiam cùm adoratur idolum si∣mul cum Deo. Exod. 20. [Deos aureos, & Deos argenteos non facietis mecum.] Bel∣larm. lib. 2. de Imag. cap. 24. §. Praetereàa.
• f 1.162

  Ne Idolatria committeretur, ait, (nempè Claudius Sainctes) cum Christo in Eucharistia debeatur summus divinus{que} cultus, non est eo Adorationis genere colendum sensibile cōntinens, quo contentus Iesus. Teste Vasquez. Ies. de Adorat. lib. 2. Disp. 8. c. 11. pag. 389.
• g 1.163

  Panis substantiam, post Consecrationem, abesse probatur, quia si unà cum Domini substantia panis sub eisdem Acci∣dentibus contineretur, periculum esset nè populus simpliciter ••doraret panem Bellar lib. 3. le Euch cap 22. initio. Et Alanus lib. 1. de Euch. cap. 34. Non posse, ait, in Eucharistia duplicem existere substantiam, quià Ecclesia esset in summo periculo Idololatriae, &c. Ratio est, quià cùm adoramus id, quod delitescit sub speciebus panis, si esset ibi adoraremus. Salmeron Ies. Tom. 9. Tract. 16. pag. 109. Contendit Claudius Sainctes, ex unitate Ado∣rationis absentiam substantiae panis colligere: Etenim si duplex maneret substantia in Sacramento, una pa∣nis, altera Christi, non posset citrà Idololatriam unica Adoratio in utramque referri. Vasquez. Ies. quo supra.
• h 1.164

  Sacramenta haec in sumente ho∣mine, quià quamdiù in eo Sacramentali∣ter sunt incertum est, nec regulariter, nec ordinariè solent ado∣rari.—Praeceptor meus D. Ioh. Bene∣dictus, Magnum Do∣minicani ordinis or∣namentum, docuit, majus esse Idololatriae periculum, si Christus adoraretur in homine, quià homo est subjectum rationis capax (honor est autem praemium virtutis) sign a verò sacra non propter se, sed propter res, quas figurant & exhibent, sunt veneranda, in ijs rantum periculi non inest, quàm si homines peculiari hoc honore propter sumptum sa∣cramentaliter, & sic aliquandiù Christum in eis habitantem prosequeremur. Sic enim homines paulatim Deos esse putaremus. Espenc. de Euch. lib. 1. cap. 6. fol. 14.
• i 1.165

  Conc. Ephesin. Tom. 1. c. 12. §. Pari. Neque homi∣nem cum verbo adorandum dicimus, sed unum eundemque, nè illud cum verbo aliquam divisionis imagina∣tionem meriti objiciat. Et Tom. 4. c. 26.—Adoratione verò non seorsim Deum, nec seorsim hominem, sed unum Christum.
• a 1.166

  Ambros. Ca∣tharinus Compsae Ar∣chiepisc. Annot. ad∣vers. nova dogmata Cajet. Card. Tit. De Veneratione & Ca∣nonizatione Sancto∣rum. pag. 126. Ob. Ec∣clesiam in Canoni∣zatione Sanctorum errare posse. Cathar. Quòd errare non po∣test, docet Turr. di∣cens, hoc esset fidei fundamentum ever∣tere. pag. 127. Ad∣duxi X••sta Qu••••ti sententiam ••n De∣creto Canonizatio∣nis Bonaventurae, ubi confidens de Spiritus Sancti supremà dire∣ctione, considenter illum Sanctum esse pronunciat, & sidel••∣ter ab omnibus teneri praecipit—Quod arroganter fecisset, si haec res ad fidem non attineret. p 128. Bonaveniu∣ram protuli, qui docet horribilissimum esse, Ecclesiam in hujusmodi errare posse, & periculosum esse in re sidei, eò quòd si unus Sanctus vocatur in dubium, etiam caeteri vocari possunt, & ità periculosum esset invocare San∣ctos. pag. 129. Adduxi iterùm testimonium Hieronymi in Epist. ad Phil. Hom••••em non sanctum Sanctorum jungere societati, esset Christum violare, cujus membra sumus. Ibid. Ob. Sat erit in universali credere, Canoni∣zationem Sanctorum veram esse: at Canonizationem hujus aut illius credere non tenemur, quià an Sanctus sit, pendet ex facto, utrùm nimirum talis fuerit, & talia fecerit, in quo Ecclesia eriare potest: quià non est error fidei, sed facti. pag. 132. Resp. Numquid Canonizatio Sanctorum sit in genere, & non in particulari de quolibet Sancto? pag. 135. Ob. Nihilominus piè credendum est, eam errare non posse. Resp. At ego crederem pietatem fidei esse divinae revelationis & authoritatis, non hominum. pag. 142 Ob. Certa autem humanâ certitu∣dine suadet credere pietas fidei, certa verè divinâ certitudine jubet credere necessitas fidei. pag. 142. Resp. Credere vivum esse membrum Christi, quod est putridum, fidem laedit: quare est error perniciosus. pag. 144. Et Thomas, si per cultum exteriorem aliquod falsum significetur, est cultus perniciosus. pag. 147. A cultu divino abesse debet omne mendacium, quià in eo fidem nostram protestamur, & cum Deo agimus & loquimur, qui omne falsum, fictum, vanum abhominatur. Haec Catharinus ibid. pag. 149.
• b 1.167

  Catharin ibid. quo supr•• Ob. Do∣ctrina haec suadetur exemplis hostiae non consecratae, quam Sacerdos exhibet a∣dorandam, ubi ••ulla Idololatria, quià si∣des Ecclesiae non ad has aut illas specie•• panis refertur, sed ad hoc, quod corpus Christi cont••etur sub speciebus panis, quando fuerit rite benedictum. Putas tu quòd minùs potest errare Ecclesia in adoratione hostiae nō consecratae, quam in cultu Sancti? p. 132. 133. Resp Catharin. Petrus de Palude asserit, nullo modo esse dandam Hosti∣am simplicem pro consecrata, quod esset Idololatria: quoni∣am cum ministratur, etiam adoranda proponitur. Et Hier. Ferrar. cui quidam objectabat, quod Hostia, per quam jurabat, non erat consecrata; Cui respondet, si ita suisset, fecisset populum Idololatrare, atque ideò tanto magis provocaret in seiram Dei—Audi, in hostia consecrata a••oratur Christus ut Deus, non sim∣pliciter, sed ut existens sub his speciebus. Cùm igitur ibi non existat Christus, sed creatura pro Christo inveni∣tur, cui exhibetur Latria, atque ideò Idololatria est. Idòlolatrae enim etiam hâc errant ratione, qùi coelum (puta) aut aliquid aliud adorabunt, putantes se ibi adorare Deum, quem animam Mundi dicebant, juxta Var∣ronis Theologiam. Non igitur excusantur ab Idololatria, quòd arbitrarentur se unum Deum colere, sicut verè erat unus Deus: sed quod illum ibi adorabant, ubi non erat eo modo, quo esse existimabant. Ibid. pag. 134. 135.
• c 1.168

  Fides divina est, quâ credimus Ie∣sum, eâdem credimus hunc esse Paulum Quartum Pontificem &c.—Non tantum humanâ fide, cui sub∣esse possit falsum. Salmeron. Ies. in Epist. Pauli part. 3. Disp. 2. pag. 183. 184. Alio∣qui eam adorare for∣midarem. pag. 185.
• * 1.169

  See the Grand Romish Imposture, &c.
• d 1.170

  Si enim fides nostra penderet ex externa intentione Ministri, commodum nobis esset repetere Baptismum in ea for∣ma, quam instituit Alex. 3. Papa, [Si baptizatus es, ego non baptizo te, &c.] cumque non magis constet nobis de se∣cundo hoc Baptismo, quam de priori, esset tertiò, quartò, & quintò Baptismus re∣petendus. Salmeron. ibid. pag. 188. Et proinde liberum erit, an ista consecrata sit hostia, & debito a∣dorationis cultu a∣doretur, & ad salu∣tem percipiant, & an verè sint Ministri Christi. Ibid. pag. 187. Signanter dixi, sub fidem divinam. pag. 184. § Vt ergò.
• * 1.171

  See above, Ch. 7. Sect. 2.
• * 1.172

  See in the same place.
• * 1.173

  See ibid. Sect. 3. & 4. in the Chal∣lenge.
• * 1.174

  See above, Chap. 6 § ••.
• a 1.175

  Dicimus ad ple∣nam resolutionem, cùm cultus termina∣tur ad ipsas creaturas, Idololatriam esse in∣justam. Alan. de Sa∣cram. in Gen. cap. 23.
• b 1.176

  Latria est cultus Deo proprius, nec per se deferendus i∣magini, ratione Rela∣tionis. Bellar. lib. 2. de Imag. ca. 24. §. Tertio.—Hic cultus, si exhi∣betur imagini prop∣ter se, est vera Ido∣lolatria. Ib. §. Dicet.—Si idem cultus ex∣hibetur imagini pro∣pter aliud, ut aequè colatur creatura at{que} Deus, certè est Idolo∣latria: nam Idolo∣latria est non solùm cum adoratur Idolū, relicto Deo, sed eti∣am cum adoratur si∣mul cum Deo. Ibid §. Praetereà.—Imagini non convenit cultus internus verus La∣triae, nec externus proprius, qualis est Sacrificium. Ibid. §. Quarta.—Qui colebant Imaginem Christi divinis honoribus, inter Haereticos numerantur ab Epiphanio, Augu∣stino, & Damasceno. Atque isti cum Christum colerent, sine dubio imaginem ejus propter ipsum colebant: non igitur Imagines licet divinis honoribus colere, i.e. cultu latriae, etiamsi quis dicat, id esse facere propter Deum, vel Christum, non propter imagines. Ibid. §. Sexta ratio. Haec Bellarminus.
• c 1.177

  Sunt benè multi, qui imagines colunt, non ut signa,—sed magis eis sidunt quàm Christo. Polydor. Virgil. Invent lib. 6 cap. 13.
• * 1.178

  Manife∣stius est, quàm ut verbis explicari possit, cultum nimium invaluisse, ità ut ad summam Paganorum adorationem nil à nostris reliqui sit factum. Cassander Consult. Art. 21. Dici non porest, quanta superstitio, ne dicam Idolo∣latria alatur apud rudem plebem. Agrippa de Vanit. cap. 57. Superstitiones in populo, dùm Imaginibus exhibent Latriae cultum. Gerson. de probat. Spir. lit x.
• d 1.179

  Fuerunt ex Ethnicis, qui simulachra adorabant, quià ea a∣nimata esse credebant divinis spiritibus. Greg. Valent. lib. 1. de Idol. cap. 2. pag. 6••0. Idololatria quintupsex apud Gentiles: I. Adoratio ipsorum simulachrorum materialium, vel Daemoniorum illis affixorum. II. Aliarum Creaturarum, ut Coeli, Terrae, &c. III. Hominum mortuorum. IV. Mundi, tanquam animati. V. Substan∣tiarum immaterialium, etiam perse, ut Daemoniorum, sive malorum Angelorum. Lorin. Ies. Com. in. Act. 17. 20. Quatuor ob causas movebantur Ethnici credere Idola esse Deos: I. quià sic edocti à Pontificibus suis. II. Q••••à videbatur totus mundus id credere. III. Quià operâ Diaboli Idola loquebantur, & movebantur. IV. Quia hu∣mana formâ praediti essent. Bellar. lib. 2. de Imag. cap. 13. §. Quartum.
• * 1.180

  See above.
• * 1.181

  See above, Ch. 7 Sect 2. at (a).
• a 1.182

  Talis error est, quo in orbe ter∣rarum nunquàm vel visus, vel auditus fu∣it—tolerabilior e∣nim est error eorum, qui pro Deo colunt statuam auream, aut alterius materiae i∣maginem, quomodò Gentiles suos Deos venerabantur, vel pannum rubrum in hastam elevatum, quod narratur de Lappis, vel viva ani∣malia, ut quondàm Aegyptij; quàm eo∣rum qui frustum pa∣nis. Coster. Ies. En∣chirid▪ de Sacram. Eu∣charist. cap. 8. §. De∣cimo.
• * 1.183

  See above. Chap. ••. Sect. 6.
• * 1.184

  See in the for∣mer Section at (d).
• * 1.185

  Act. 27. 23.
• * 1.186

  Heb. 11. ••.
• * 1.187

  Esay 44. 15 &c
• a 1.188

  Conc. Carth. 6. Can. 20. Quoniam sunt quidam, qui die Dominico slectunt genua in diebus Pen∣tecostes: placuit san∣ctae & magnae Syno∣do cunctos—stantes Deum orare debere. Durant. de Ritib. lib. 3. cap. 2. num. 21. Hoc ipsum diebus quin∣quaginta à Pascha usque ad Pentecosten observari consuetum veteres Patres testan∣tur. Ratio ex Am∣brosio Serm. 21. de Pentecoste, quia Re∣surrectionem Domi∣ni celebremus: & ut Hieron. Proem. in E∣pist. ad Ephes. Non ••lectimus genua, non cu••vamur in terra, sed cum Domino sur∣gentes ad alta sustol∣limus.
• b 1.189

  Calvin. Insti∣tut. lib. 4. §. 37. Iam verò longius prolapsi sunt (viz. Papistae) ritus enim excogitâ∣runt prorsùs extran••∣os, in hoc, ut signum divinis honoribus af∣ficiant. At Christo (inquiunt) hanc ve∣nerationem deferi∣mus. Primùm si in coena hoc fieret, dice∣rem eam esse adora∣tionem legitimam, quae non in signo re∣sidet, sed ad Christū in coelo sedentem di∣rigitur.
• c 1.190

  Calvin. de••ens. Sanct. Doct••. advers. Westphal. Sive utili∣tas nostra spectetur, sive dignitas & reve∣rentia, quam Sacra∣mento deferri par est. pag. 25. Rursus, Profani, quià sacrae cōmunicationis pig∣nus, quod reverenter suscipere decebat—non mirum si corpo∣ris & sanguinis Chri∣sti rei censeantur. I∣bid. pag. 39.
• * 1.191

  See above, Book 1. Chap. 2. Sect. 6. 7.
• * 1.192

  Heb. 11. 1.
• * 1.193

  Heb. 11. 6.
• * 1.194

  Psal. 116. 10 & 2. Cor. 4. 13.
• * 1.195

  Rom 10. 14.
• * 1.196

  See the Con∣sent of Fathers above Chap. 4. Sect. 2.
• a 1.197

  Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 27. §. Quantum ad.—Nova haeresis orta est hoc tempore, cujus Author Luthe∣rus, non requiri in∣teriorem ••tention•• Ministri ad perfecti∣onem Sacramenti: non tàm inquit in Conferentis quàm suscipientis fide sita est virtus Baptismi: & si Minister joco absolveret, sitamen credat se absolutum, verissimè est absolutus. Et §. Johannes Calvinus—Vt si Minister totam actionem intùs subsannans, coenam Christi ri••u legitimo administ••et, non dubitem panem & vinum mihi esse verissima Christi corporis & sanguinis pignora. Sic e••••••m Protestantes alij—Catholicorum sententia est, quae est Concil. Trid. Requiri intentionem faciendi quod facit Ecclesia. Et pau••ò post. §. Ad hanc.—Ad hanc Haereticorum sententiam accessit Ambros. Catharinus: quo excepto, in hac do∣ctrina, mi••si••è conveniunt Catholici Doctores.
• b 1.198

  Salmeron. Ies. Intentio duplex, publica, in observan∣do formam publicam in pronunciatione verborum, &c. Altera verò privata & parti∣cularis ipsius Mini∣stri, qui aut nihil cre∣dit eorum, quae facit, aut derisoriè facit, aut contrariam habet intentionem non cō∣ferendi Sacramenta.—At ejus Intentio non est absolutè ne∣cessaria. Rat. I. Quià cùm intentio intima sit latens in corde e∣jus insensibilis, se∣queretur hominū a∣nimos torqueri scru∣pulis & dubitationi∣bus, an verum susci∣piant Sacramentum: quod sanè Scripturis et Patribus contrari∣um est, qui nos firmâ fide Sacramentum suscipere adhortan∣tur. II. Rat. Quia sic hominum salus ex hominum aliquotū arbitrio penderet: et sic homines plus no∣cere possent quam Christus juvare. III. Quià plecterentur Innocentes propter hominum malitiam, quod remotum est à divina bonitate. IV. Quià sic liberum erit Omnibus dubirare an Baptizati sint, et an Eucharistiam adorent. V. Quià hoc dogma proximum erit Donatistarum haeresi, contra quos disputat Augustinus, docens per malos ministros conferri salutaria Sacra∣menta. VI. Mirum est olim Ecclesiam, in controversia Novatianorum & Donatistarum, asserentium Baptismū ab haereticis collatum nullum esse, de debita illa intetione Ministri nihil disputâsse. Ergo satis est publica Actio, nisi Minister contra protestetur, aut aliquo modo vitiet formam Sacramenti. Sufficit eatenus publicus Actus, ut Notarius publicum conficiens Instrumentum, nec potest intentione sua internâ, licet derisoriè agat, illud validum reddere. Pro hac sententia stant multi Patres. Aug. lib. 1. cont. literas Petil. oppugnans illud Donatistarum. Con∣scientia dantis abluit conscientiam accipientis. Salmer Ies. in Epist. Pauli Disp. 2. pag. 186.
• * 1.199

  Phil. 1. 18.
• c 1.200

  Suarez. Ies. Simpliciter adoran∣dus est Christus in Eucharistia, & aliud exigere ex iis esset superstitiosum, & va∣nis scrupulis, & super∣stitionibus expositū: neque enim est con∣sentaneum ibi trepi∣dare, ubi non est vel probabilis ratio ti∣mendi, sed potiùs periculum nè dubita∣tione devotio animi minuatur. Tom. 3. qu. 79. Art. 8. Disp. 65. Sect. 2.
• * 1.201

  See above, Chap. 5. Sect. 6. at (a).
• i 1.202

  Lessius Ies. Opusc. Tract. de Praescien condit. cap. 21. §. Sed contra.—Moralis certitudo non est abso∣luta, sed secundùm quid, qualis nimiùm per conjecturas possit haberi ex signis, cum quibus non necessariò con∣jungitur veritas rei signatae.
• d 1.203

  Aug. contr. Faust. Manich. lib. 20 cap. 21. Nos à Cere∣re & Libero Paga∣norum Diis longè absumus.