D. Heskins, D. Sanders, and M. Rastel, accounted (among their faction) three pillers and archpatriarches of the popish synagogue (vtter enemies to the truth of Christes Gospell, and all that syncerely professe the same) ouerthrowne, and detected of their seuerall blasphemous heresies. By D. Fulke, Maister of Pembrooke Hall in Cambridge. Done and directed to the Church of England, and all those which loue the trueth.

The three and fortieth Chapter maketh recapitulation of the conference of the Masses of the Apostles, and Fathers of the primi∣tiue Church, and of the Catholike Church that now is, with a breef••* 1.1

confutation of the conference made by the proclamer, betweene th•• Masse of Saint Iames, and that is now vsed.

* 1.2The recapitulation conteining nothing but that, which is confuted in the discourse at large, I will omitte it, and come to the conference, that the Bishop made betweene the liturgie falsely ascribed to S. Iames, and the Popishe Masse, beeing content for the time to call it Saint Iames Masse, as Maister Heskins doth, although neither it is a Masse, nor such as it is, was it writtē by S. Iames the Apo∣stle, but by some of much later time as appeareth by the prayer therein conteined, for such as liue in Monasteries, and other thinges fauouring of the errours of that time, in which it was written. The first point of the conference is, that S. Iames saide Masse in the common tong vnderstoode of the people, the Papistes say Masse in a straunge tonge. M. Heskins answereth, that this point toucheth not the substance: for the Masse may be good, though it be not vnderstood: but he himselfe maketh y^e doctrine of the Masse, to be of the substance of it, wherefore seeing there lacketh doctrine in the Masse, there lacketh one of the foure substantiall partes. But he would make the reading of the epistle and Gospel in Latine Doctrine, and good doctrine. What doctrine that is, by which the people are not taught, let reasonable men iudge, for although all the Masse were nothing but scripture, yet it were not good to be read in the Church, in a straunge tong: 1. Cor. 14. because it were not profitable for edifying. His childish sophismes of Pla∣to, his substance and his accidents, I disdaine to rehearse: the trueth is manifest.

The second comparison S. Iames spake out of the words of consecration. They in their Masse suppresse them and keepe them close. Maister Heskins aunswereth, this is a small fault, and from the Masse of S. Iames, flyeth to S. Basils Masse, Where it is said, the Bishop prayeth secretly, yet he spake the wordes (as they call them) of consecration openly. The thirde comparison S. Iames in his Masse ministred the communion to the people, The Papists in their Masse, receiue them

selues alone. To this he aunswereth, denying that S. Iames did always minister the communion to the people, which is an impudent shift, except he will denie the fourme of that liturgie, which prescribeth the ministration to the people after the consecration. His reason is, because in Chrysostomes liturgie, which was written more then a thousand yeares after S. Iames, and falsely beareth the name of Chrysostome, there is a rule what the priest shall doe when there are no communicants.

The fourth comparison: S. Iames ministred the com∣munion to the people vnder both kindes: The Papists in their Masse in one kinde onely. Here hath he none other refuge, but to say, that S. Iames did not alwayes minister vnder both kindes. Then let him denie the credite of the liturgie, which prescribeth the cōmunion to be ministred in both kindes.

The fift comparison: Saint Iames preached and set foorth the death of Christ: They in their Masse haue onely a number of dumbe gestures and ceremonies, which they themselues vnderstand not, and make no manner of mention of Christes death. M. Hes. complay∣neth of the Bishops repetitions, imputing them to want of stuffe, when he himselfe moste absurdly repeateth his three vntruthes surmised to be in this assertion, which he set downe before in the 39. Chapter, whither I referre the Reader for the answere. Only this I wil note, that he can finde no other preaching to the people, but the Aulbe to signifie the white garment that Christe was sent in from Herode: the vestiment, the garment that he was mocked in, in the house of Pilate: the Crosse vpon the vestiment signifieth the crosse of Christe which he did beare, as the priest doth on his backe: the eleuation signifieth the lif∣ting vp of Christe on the crosse: he might say by as good reason, the Priests hands signified the two theeues, & the Priest himselfe the tormentors, that did lift him vp to the crosse. Beholde this is the preaching of Christes death in the Masse, whether it be an impudent vntruth, (as Maister Heskins tearmeth it) to call these dumbe gestures and ceremonies, or M. Heskins an impudent beast to defend

these dombe signes for preaching of Christes death, let the reader in Gods name consider and iudge. The sixth comparison: S. Iames Masse was full of knowledge: their Masse is full of ignorance. M. Heskins aunswereth, that there is as much knowledge in their Masse, as in S. Iames Masse, be∣cause in substance it is all one: which if it were true, as it is most false, yet what knowledge can be, when al is done in a strange language, and no preaching, but by dombe signes, as we heard before? The seuenth: S. Iames Masse was full of consolation: their Masse is full of superstition. To this he aunswereth, they haue as much consolation, which cannot be when they haue no preaching of the Gospel: & how can he say that they haue no superstition, when they haue an hundred idle ceremonies and gestures, which Christ neuer instituted, and therfore are meere will wor∣ship and superstition. The eyghth comparison, he saith, is all one with the third: that the people resorted to receiue the communion, when S. Iames sayed Masse. Although it followe of the thirde, yet is it not all one with it, for as S. Iames was readie to minister, so the people ordinari∣ly were readie to receiue, which is not looked for of the popish priestes, because they reach them that it is neede∣lesse so to doe. The last comparison: Saint Iames in his Masse had Christes institution: they in their Masse haue well more nothing else but mans inuention. To this he aunswereth, that they haue Christes institution for their Masse, which is an impudent falshood, either for their carnall maner of presence, or for their sacrifice, or for their priuate recei∣uing, or for their depriuing the people of all doctrine, but such as is by dombe signes, which he is not afrayde to ascribe to the inuention of the holy Ghost, as though the spirite of God in ceremonies, would be contrary to him selfe in the scriptures.

After this he reporteth the substantiall differences, betweene the Masse, and the newe communion as he cal∣leth it, which because they be all set foorth and aunswe∣red before in the 34.35.36. Chapters of this booke, I will leefe no time about his vaine recapitulation, or re∣petition

of them, contayning nothing but rayling and slaundering.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Hesk.
• * 1.2

  Fulk.