[The principal points which are at this daye in controuersie, concerning the holly supper and of the masse.]:

Of the principall pointes which are at this day in controuersie, concer∣ning the holy Supper of Iesus Christ and the Masse of the Romaine Church, and of the resolution of them.

¶ The first Booke.

Chapter. 1.

Of the principal reasons whereupō they ground them selues which mainteine the Masse, and of the waight of them.

IT is no maruell if they which haue bene nourished vnder the Masse euē from their childhode, are greatly offended when they heare the same blamed and con∣demned as a false seruice by the which God is dishonoured and blasphemed, seing that the same hath bene accompted heretofore for the most holy thing that euer was in the worlde, since the first creation thereof. And in deede they should haue iust cause to be offended in that be∣halfe, if the reasons which cause them to haue such opinion of the holines thereof, were so certaine & true as they thinke them to be, and cause them selues to beleue, for so much as they haue bene so

instructed. For first they haue bene taught that it was instituted and celebrated by Iesus Christe him selfe: and afterward continued by his Apo∣stles, & consequently by al their successours from age to age, euen from the first institution of the same euen vntil our time. And then they do consi∣der the matter whereof al the pieces of the same are composed, the which they doe thinke to be all taken out of y^e holy Scripture, because that some of those pieces are taken from thence. And there∣fore they say, Haue you not in it the Epistle & the Gospell, and the Pater noster, and the Credo? Are not these good things? Beholde then three reasons of very great apparauntes which they doe alledge for them selues, of the which the first is taken of the institution of the Masse, and of the authour of the same: and the second of his long continuance, which is as they thinke euen from the death and passion of Iesus Christe vntill our age: & the third is taken of y^e matter of the good and holy wordes & things whereof it is cōposed. If all these reasons were true and well grounded vpon trueth, they were worthy of great accompt. For, for the first, how great a crime is it to reiect and condemne the ordinaunces of the Sonne of God? And afterward what a pride were it, to make so small accompt of the common consent of the whole Church of God, and of so many ho∣ly men, and of so long a time? And on the other

side shoulde they bee accompted for Christians which do reiect the expressed word of God?

Chapter .ii.

Of the examination of the reasons before al∣leadged: and whether the Sacrament of the holy Supper of the Lord, and the Sacramēt of the Altar, and the Masse of the Romaine Church, be one verie thing or els be things different and contrary.

SEeing then that they alleadge such reasons, & that they giue them so goodly a shewe, it re∣steth nowe to consider whether they bee true or false. For if they be true, they haue then wonne their processe. But if they be false, they may not finde it straunge at all, if that a man doe discouer the falshod which hindereth the knowledge of the truth of this matter. And therefore so farre forth as it toucheth the institution of the Masse, and the authour of the same, we doe first aske them what it is that they do vnderstand by this word Masse: for if they vnderstand by the same the Sacramēt of the holy supper of the Lorde, we will easely graunt them that Iesus Christ him selfe did in∣stitute and administer the same holy Sacrament, and gaue commaundement to his Apostles, and to all their true successours to do the like, euen as he did in the institution and administration of the

same, and that they haue done it according to the cōmandement which was giuen vnto thē. But if they vnderstand by this worde Masse, such a ser∣uice as is that which at this day is so called, in the Church that is called Catholike Romaine, wee do not onely then not graunt that Iesus Christe did euer institute that Masse, nor that euer the A∣postles or their true successours did euer celebrate such an one, but y^t which more is, we say, that so farre of it is that such a Masse may be the holy sa∣cramēt of the supper instituted by Iesus Christ, that on the contrary, the ordinance of the Lorde is there wholy ouerthrowē, with the whole forme of the holy supper and of the diuine seruice which hath alwayes bene obserued in the true ancient Church, by meane of the reasons which I will anon yeelde.

Chapter .iii.

VVhether Iesus Christ or his Apostles did euer ordeine, saye, or celebrate the Masse: and of the ancientie of the same, and of the work∣men which layed their handes to the fra∣ming thereof, and of the pieces which haue bene added vnto it by succession of time.

THus much touching the foundation of their first reason, which is the strongest & the most apparant that they haue. For if they cannot shew

that their Masse is of the institution of Iesus Christ, and of the ordinance of God, it must then necessarily be placed amongst the inuentions and traditions of men, by the which God him selfe doth witnes, not onely by the mouth of the Pro∣phet Isai,* 1.1 but also by that of his own sonne Iesus Christ, that he is serued in vaine. Wherefore, if this first foundation be already ouerthrowen, the second which is founded vpon the same, will also be forthwith ouerthrowen. For if Iesus Christ did not institute such a Masse, nor his Apostles & their true successors did euer celebrate or knowe such an one, at the least for the time of six hun∣dreth yeres after the ascension of our Lord Iesus Christ: where is that whereupon they will builde the auncientie thereof, and the long and cōtinual succession, and the common and publique consent of all the Church, for so long a time wherewith they make them selues so great a buckler? It is here then needefull to enquire, and to consider what difference there is betweene the Sacra∣ment of the supper ordeined by Iesus Christe, and that which is called the sacrament of the Al∣tar in the Romish Church, and how long time the holy supper of the Lorde did remaine whole and perfect, and when it began to be changed, corrup∣ted, ouerthrowen, and conuerted into the same fashion that it nowe is in the Masse of the Ro∣maine Church. For their owne doctours can not

deny but that since the time of Iesus Christ and of his Apostles, and of the first and most auncient Christian Church, they haue chaunged and added much to the first institution of the Lord, and in the forme of the administration of this holy Sacra∣ment the which the Apostles did vse. For this cause no one, but the most shamelesse amōgst thē dare saye openly, that Iesus Christ did ordeine & make the Masse, but they saye that he gaue onely the matter, and that afterward the Church gaue it the fashion by the successours of the Apostles, & chiefly by the Romaine Popes, wherein they doe greatly honour the sonne of God. For if it be so, he did but rough hewe the worke, whereof he left the matter confused and euill polished, as a first purtraiture rude and not polished, leauing the thing to be better polished, adorned and brought to perfection by those which should come after him, the which worke was not made perfect by one or twoo workmen only, but by a great num∣ber as they them selues do witnesse. For they are not so shamelesse that they dare affirme that it was made or perfected, neither by one workman onely, but by many, nor at one instant, nor at one onely time, but in sundry ages.

Chapter. iiii.

Of the principall authours of the Masse, allead∣ged by the Romaine doctors, and of the di∣uersitie

of Masses, as well Greekes as Latins, and of those Masses which were celebrated by the Apostles.

THose which dare not make Iesus Christ the authour, do attribute the fashion of it, some to Saint Iames, others to Basile the great, and some other to Gregorie the first. And in deede they doe set forth diuerse formes of Masses, the one sorte Greeke, y^e other Latin masses, which are greatly different amōg thē selues. As touching y^e Greeke Masses they do againe set forth diuerse formes, the one of Basile, the other of Chrysostome. And as touching that of Chrysostome, they do not set forth onely one forme, but two at the least. And as touching the Latin masse, the principall ho∣nour whereof they giue to Gregory the first, how many craftes men haue there bene which haue laid their handes vnto it, euer adding something the one to y^e others inuentions, according as their owne doctours & the historians of the Romaine Church do witnesse? And after the time of Gre∣gory the first, how many pieces haue bene added vnto it? and how long a time was it before it was such an one as it is at this present? How thē is Iesus Christ the author, or Saint Iames, or any other of the Apostles? And how did the Apostles sing and celebrate the masse, the one in one coun∣trey, and the others in others, as many of the Ro∣maine

doctors doe boldely and assuredly affirme without any shame at all, cleane contrary to the euidēt testimonies as wel of the holy scriptures, as of their owne doctors & historians, which giue testimonie of all the peeces that euery one of the said craftes men which haue wrought in the same worke haue added thereunto. Whether their te∣stimonies be true or no, I will not now enter in∣to disputation of it. It suffiseth that those which do vpholde the Masse do vouch them, and that by their own testimony, the which they doe receiue, they are conuinced that there was no such masse as there is at this day in the Romaine Churche, not onely in the Apostles time, neither also in a long time after their daies.* 1.2 How then commeth it to passe that the Apostles could sing and cele∣brate the masse before that it was made or borne? If they take the masse for the supper, I will wil∣lingly graunt, that all the Apostles and their true successors haue often celebrated the same: But it was in the same maner that Iesus Christ did in∣stitute and administer it, & not in the same maner that it hath bene since disguised and conuerted in∣to masse, and such as nowe it is celebrated in the Romaine Churche: wherefore it is a great filthi∣nes or too great a malice, so to disguise things, to make the poore ignoraunt people to beleeue that the masse is of the institution of Iesus Christ and of his Apostles, and that they them selues ha••e ce∣lebrated

the same, and that euen from their time it hath alwayes bene obserued in the Church, such as it is at this daie in the Romaine. For it is an o∣uer filthy and shameles lye.

Chapter. v.

Of the names of the Supper and of the Masse, and whether the differēce that is at this day because of the same betweene the reformed Church and the Romaine, is onely for the names and titles, or els for the matter and substance, and whether the Masse be in sub∣stance the Supper of the Lord.

IT must then be that the Romaine doctors con∣fesse, that the Masse which they do now call the Masse, is farre different from that which they af∣firme to haue bene said and celebrated by the Apo∣stles and their true successours. And if they do re∣plie that it is the same in substance, and that there is no difference, but in respect of the ceremonies and ornamentes wherewith it hath bene adorned and enriched since that time, by the successours of the Apostles: we must yet see whether it be so or no. Behold then one point which standeth yet in question: whereupon it must be considered whe∣ther y^e Masse, such as it is at this day, be in substāce the holy supper of Iesus Christ or no, such as he him self did institute & administer, & his Apostles

and his true Church did receiue from him, and did celebrate according to his ordinance and cō∣maundement. For our chiefe controuersie is not for the wordes or for the names, but for the thing it selfe & the very substance thereof, for the which we are at controuersie. Wherefore when we shal agree vpon the substance, we shall then easely a∣gree vpon the accidentes & names, so farre forth as the thing which they do signifie, be conteined in the holy scriptures, and in the Lords ordināce, as we do it in the name of the trinitie and of Sa∣crament, and such like. For albeit that the very same wordes are not founde either in the olde te∣stament, or in the newe, yet for all that we doe re∣ceiue them, for so much as the things signified by them are therein conteined. Wherefore it would be vncomely and of small edification to debate vpon names and wordes, when men are agreed vpon the things that they would signifie by these same. It resteth now that we vnderstand the one the other, and that we do agree vpon the sense ac∣cording to the which we shall take the wordes which we shall vse.* 1.3 As touching the Sacrament whereof we do nowe speake, it is called by Saint Paul, sometime the table, an other time the supper of the Lord, and also the Communion and com∣munication of the body and of the blood of the Lord. Seeing then that the holy Ghost hath giuē vnto it such names & titles by this holy Apostle,

it is then the surest and the best to vse the same. This notwithstanding, if the Romaine Catho∣liques will call it both Masse and Sacrament of the Altar, we will not greatly striue for it, proui∣ded that we do agree in the principal point of our different.

Chapter. vi.

Of the chiefe different that is betweene the re∣formed Church and the Romaine, touching the Supper and the Masse, and of the meane to agree it.

IF then they be able to shewe that their Masse is in substance the very supper of the Lorde, and their sacrament of the Altar his very table, our strife is ended. For we will neuer striue against the trouth, when they shall make it appeare vnto vs by good and sure testimonies of the worde of God, the which is reueiled vnto vs by the scrip∣tures. But if they cannot shewe the same vnto vs by this meane, and that we be able to shewe them the contrarie by the same meane which wee re∣quire of them, to wit, that the Masse such as it is at this day, is not only not the very table and sup∣per of the Lord, but is wholy cōtrary to the same, we beseech them that they woulde not resist the manifest truth, but that they giue glory to God, and do suffer that their Masse be so reformed ac∣cording to the ordinance of Iesus Christe, that

as it hath bene peruerted into the same, euen so the same may be restored againe to y^e true forme which he gaue to his holy supper, and was obser∣ued in the auncient Church. And then when that shalbe done, which is so iust and reasonable that nothing can be more, all the controuersies shalbe ended, and they shalbe no more deuided nor ban∣ded the one against the other for the supper and for the masse: wherein euery mā may iudge whe∣ther we demaunde any thing that is not very iust and very reasonable, and whether they may iustly refuse the same. It resteth yet that I do declare the principall reasons which doe hinder vs from the accepting of y^e masse, such as they do set forth vnto vs for the true supper of the Lorde, and for what cause we may in no wise receiue nor accept the same, but are cōstrained to reiect it, as a thing which cannot agree with the true Christian reli∣gion, if there be not such reformation that it be no more that which it is at this present, but that it be the true supper of the Lorde, such as it is set forth vnto vs by the Euangelistes and the Apostles, who are sure and true witnesses of the doctrine and of the ordināces and workes of Iesus Christ their master, who did chuse and call them to that office.

Chapter. vii.

Of those which will allowe the Masse by the good and faire wordes takē out of the holy

scriptures which are conteined in the same, and what iudgement and consideration is meete to be had of the same.

BUt before that I doe expounde these reasons throughly, I will yet touche one point, con∣cerning that which hath bene spoken of the good and holy wordes which are in the masse. I do not deny but it is so: but I do answere further,* 1.4 that it is not enough to haue good wordes taken out of holy letters, except they be wel applied to their true vse, and to that ende whereunto they ought to serue. For if it were not so, a man might by the like reason allowe, not onely the charmes and en∣chantments of Charmers, Sorcerers and En∣chanters, but also the Alchoran of Mahomet, and the doctrine in maner of all the heretiques. For there be many good & faire words takē out of the holy scriptures, and faire names of God and of Iesus Christe our Lord. And if the crosses might serue to the holinesse of the things with y^e words, they haue ordinarily many in charmes & inchant∣ments. It is not enough then to haue such words,* 1.5 if the right vse of them be not had with them. And further it must be seene whether there be any thing mingled with them, which doth corrupt them, as doth poyson good meate which other∣wise is of it self good. For there needeth no great quantitie of poyson to corrupt the best meates of

the worlde, and the better that the meat is, the more daungerous is the poyson which is hidden vnder the same, for so much as it is very hard to discouer it, and that men are the more prouoked to take it. Wherefore so farre of is it from let∣ting y^e poyson to be any more poyson, that it ma∣keth it more daungerous, & more mortall, if that the poyson be not expelled by a contrapoyson. It is not then altogether to see if there be faire and good words in y^e masse taken of y^e holy scriptures: but we must yet consider whether there bee any poyson, false doctrine, and mens tradicions mixed with them. And if there be any such, a man may profite nothing at all by it, but may be hurt there∣by, if the same poyson be not taken away and ex∣pelled by his contrapoyson, the which can not be taken but of the pure word of God. And there∣fore the controuersie vpon y^e which we are at this present, resteth yet in this, to witte, whether al the meat which is set forth to vs in y^e masse, be wholy good, or whether there be poyson mixed with the same: if it be al good, then may there none of it be reiected: if there be poyson, no man may receiue it without danger and perill.

Chapter. viii.

Whether there be any thing in the Masse other then good wordes, and whether those good wordes which are in it be well applied: and

whether that for those good woordes, the Masse ought to be accompted good.

ANd euen as good meate doth not let but that poyson is alwaye poyson, and maketh it more hurtfull: euen so the good and holy wordes doe not let at all, but that God is dishonoured in thē, when men do abuse thē: [Note.] for the more holy & bles∣sed that a thing is, so much the more is the abuse thereof detestable in the sight of God, & so much the more is he dishonored, for so much as his holy name is there the more prophaned. By meane whereof so farre of is it, that the charmes and en∣chantments be the better because of the names of God and of Iesus Christ, & of the virgine Mary, and of men and women Sainctes, & of the good wordes of the holy scriptures that may be in thē, that they are in deede so much the more execrable and cursed. For seeing that the thing of it selfe is euill, it is yet made much worse, when that which should serue to the honor of God, is there applied to his dishonor. Wherefore it is like to blasphe∣mies. For when men do blaspheme God, they do take his name in their mouth:* 1.6 but he is more dis∣honored by y^t meane, then though they did wholy abstaine from naming him. For they do not vse it at all, as they do which take it in their mouth to call vpon God and to sanctifie him, but do abuse it not onely taking it in vaine, but also villainously

profaning and polluting the same. Therfore Ire∣nee saieth,* 1.7 that the heretiques, and cōsequently, al those which abuse the holy scriptures, do with thē, euen as when an excellēt workman should make the image of a king very faire and of fine golde, and well furnished with all fortes of precious stones, and there did come an euill workeman, which should take the same matter, and should make thereof either a dogge or an ape, or some o∣ther beast, or some monster. Albeit that it should be alwayes one selfe matter, very good and very excellent, yet for all that the workemāship should be greatly different, and the matter very euill ap∣plied, in as much as by applying thereof they should destroy a good & very faire piece of work, to make one both euil and filthy. And by the same meane a man should do great wrong to the king, in so counterfaiting his image. It is not enough then to take the matter whereof the Prophetes & the Apostles haue made the worke of the Lord, if it be not euenly laide, squared, and wrought as they them selues haue done it.* 1.8 For if any man make an other worke contrary to theirs, and by the which theirs should be destroyed, the stuffe which men haue taken of thē is not well applied. Wherefore so farre of is it, that the worke is the better because of the same, that on the contrary it is more worthy of blame. Thus much for the shuting vp of the mouthes of those which doe al∣leadge

the good woordes and the good things which are in the Masse, if they cannot otherwise shew the goodnes thereof, and that there be no∣thing at all in it that is good and applied as it ought to be.

Chapter. ix.

Of the diuision of the matters which shalbe handled hereafter, and of the principall pointes which are at this day in controuer∣sie concerning the Supper and the Masse.

I Wil now come to the principal points which do moue vs by good reason, not in any wise to allowe the masse, being of the same forme and qualitie that at this day it is set forth vnto vs, of the which pointes I will firs make a generall diuision, and afterward a more special, and then I will propone and expounde them all, the one after the other, euery one of them in his place. The first diuision which is the most generall, shall conteine fiue pointes, of the which fiue pointes I will after ward make more special di∣uisions.* 1.9 The first is touching the matter and all the pieces and inuentions and humaine tra∣dicions in generall, whereof it is compounded. The second is of the wordes of the same in spe∣ciall. And the third is of the signes, and of the things signified by them. The fourth of the prayers. The fift of the collectes. As touching

the second point, which concerneth in special the wordes of the masse, I deuide it againe into three points, The first is touching the language of them. The second concerning the pronuncia∣tion. The thirde concerning the application of them. And for the third point, which is con∣cerning the signes and the things signified, I do deuide them againe into six other pointes. The first is the transubstantiation of the signes. The second, the adoration of them. The third, the reseruation and application which vsed beside the vse of the supper. The fourth is of the sacrifice. The fift is of the cōmunion. The sixt, of the application, aswell of the sacrifice as of the communion, both for the dead and for the li∣uing. Now concerning the first, the fourth and the fifth. Of the fiue pointes which I did in the first place set forth in generall, I doe not at all make any other more speciall diuision of them. Now all these pointes ioyned and comprehen∣ded together, do amount to the number of 12. the which I am not determined here to handle all at large, but onely summarily, to the ende that men may vnderstand, which be the princi∣pall differences to agree vpon between the re∣formed Church and the Romaine Church, con∣cerning the Sacrament of the supper, and that of the Masse.

Chapter. x.

Of the first general point which is of the whole matter of the Masse, and of the additions vvhich men haue giuen to the supper of the Lorde in the same, by the vvhich they haue cleane ouerthrovven his institution.

THe first point then that we doe condemne in the Masse, is, that ingeneral there are so ma∣ny inuentions, traditions, and humane additiōs to the Lordes institution, & so many chaunges and disguisings of the same, and so many cere∣monies and foolish and doultishe superstions, and insufferable Idolatries, that there remai∣neth in the same no kinde of forme of the pure ordinance of the Lord, but that it is there wholy ouerthrowen. And by the same meane the ex∣pressed word of God is there openly violated, in as much as it is so often and so expressedly for∣hidden by the same, in y^e holy scriptures,* 1.10 to adde or to diminish any thing to or from the lawe, sta∣tutes and ordinances of the Lorde, or to go out either on the right hand or els on the left. For the which cause Saint Paul meaning to correct the abuses which were already in his time com∣mitted in the supper among the Corinthes, said plainely, setting foorth the institution of Iesus Christ: I haue receiued of the Lord that which also I haue deliuered vnto you.* 1.11 And after ward

he expoundeth it point by poynt, in what sorte Iesus Christe did institute and administer this holy Sacrament, and ordeined it to be admini∣stred afterward in his Church, wherein he ment to giue plainely to vnderstand, not onley to the Corinthes, but also to the whole Churche of God, as well for that present time as for all the time to come, that the institution of the Lord is pure, whole and perfect, & what rule there was and is to be obserued in such matter, without adding any thing to it, or diminishing, chāging, and disguising any thing from it or in it. For if Saint Paul which was plucked vp euen to the third heauen,* 1.12 and who sawe there secrets incom∣prehensible to man, and hath so faire and excel∣lent a testimonie of his vocatiō by Iesus Christ him selfe, neither would nor durst take in hande such a matter, but did content him selfe with the simple ordinance of the Lord, and tied him selfe to the fame rule, and did drawe thereunto the whole Church, what pride is this in those which dare vndertake more then he, yea more then the very sonne of God him selfe did: These which are so audacious, ds they not feare at all the cur∣ses which are denounced by Saint Iohn in the A∣pocalypse,* 1.13 to all those which either adde or dimi∣nish any thing to or from the doctrine reuealed by the Lord? for that which he saith in his Apo∣calypse, doth no lesse agree to all the rest of the

body of the holy scriptures then to it selfe, for so much as there is no canonicall booke which is of lesse authoritie. And if Saint Paul did assub∣iecte the very Angels to the Gospell which he had preached, [Note.] who dare set him selfe vp aboue them?

Chapter. xi.

Of the second generall point which is of the wordes of the Masse, and of the diuision of the same into his members, and first of the language of the Masse.

AS concerning the second point, which is touching the wordes of the Masse, we haue to note first, that albeit that it were so, that there were not one onely worde in the whole content of the same, but that it were taken out of the ho∣ly Scriptures, and were very agreeable to the same: yet for all that, there are three great and insufferable faultes therein, of the which three the first is commō and generall to all the whole Masse, and euery part thereof: the other two be∣long more speciall to the sacramentall wordes, but they are notwithstanding altogether mani∣festly repugnant to the expressed worde of God, and to the institution of the holy Supper. And by that meane this second point doth conteine those other three, of which I made mention in the diuision of the same, which are touching the

language, pronunciation and application of the wordes. As touching the first, it is manifestly against the expresse commaundement of God, in that that he hath expressedly forbidden by S. Paul, that in the assemblies of the Church,* 1.14 there should be neither praiers nor other words spokē in a tongue which were not knowen to y^e whole assemblie, if there were not forthwith some one to expounde the same in a tongue which should be well vnderstoode by the whole congregatiō. Now it is so that al that euer is spoken & sung in the masse, is there said & sung in an vnknowē language, at the least, to the greatest part of the people and assistantes, & oftentimes to them al. Whereof it foloweth according to the testimo∣nie of S. Paul, that the commandement of God is there manifestly violated.* 1.15 Whereupon I doe further conclude, that the masse can not be the supper of the Lord, for so much as he hath plain∣ly commanded that men should set forth the re∣membrāce of him in the same. Which thing can not be done by vnknowen language, but onely by such a language as is vnderstoode of all, as Saint Paul doth sufficiently declare, when ex∣pounding the wordes of Iesus Christe concer∣ning this commemoration,* 1.16 he saith plainly, You shall shewe the Lordes death vntil the time that he come. The which shewing cannot be set forth by a language not vnderstoode, but onely by

preaching and doctrine set foorth in a language which may be vnderstoode of all, for so much as speach without vnderstāding profiteth no more then though a man spake not at all. For that is as much, as though he y^t speaketh were domme, and he which heareth were dease.

Chapter. xii.

Of the pronunciation of the woordes of the Masse, and chiefly of those which are called sacramentall, and what fault there is com∣mitted in the same, as wel against the com∣mandement of God, as against the lawes Imperiall.

FUrthermore, we haue yet to note in the other point, which is of the pronunciation of the wordes of the Masse, that albeit that whatsoe∣uer should be there said in a lāguage that should be vnderstoode of al men, yet for all that, [Note.] it could be in no wise sufferable, that any thing should be there recited with a whispering voyce, & name∣ly the principall wordes, which do properly be∣long to the institution of the supper, and chiefly those which they do cal sacramentall: the which they do pronounce with so soft a voice, as they can not be heard of any man, no not of those which are neerest the priest which pronounceth them: so farre of are they from being vnder∣stoode

by all the assemblie. Wherein they fall a∣gaine into the first inconuenience that I haue already touched. For be it that they speake with a loude voice in an vnknowen tongue, or with a softe voice, in a knowen tongue, in sort that he is not heard at all, or els that mē can not vnder∣stande the wordes, the one sort is euen as good as the other. This notwithstanding, they do cō∣mit both the faultes in all their masses, chiefly in their cannon and in many other pieces, and namely in those, the which because of the same they do call the secrets. For beside that, that the language of them is vnknowē, at the least to the greatest part, they adde thereunto also the pro∣nunciation so soft, & so secret, that hardly there is any man that may vnderstand one only word thereof, as I haue already said. This thing is common to all Masses, as well high as lowe. For they haue these two sortes, the which they do so distinguishe according to the pronuncia∣tion which they vse in the same. They call high masses,* 1.17 those which they say with song, because that they speake and crie more loude in them. Yet are they greatly to be blamed in the very same, that they sing, in so much as they doe vse such songs as doth greatly hinder the vnderstā∣ding of it, euen to those which could otherwise vnderstand the wordes and the language. For how many notes do they put oftentimes to one

sillable, from whence it commeth to passe that they make the woordes and the pronunciation of them so long, and doe make so great di∣stance from one sillable to an other, that men forget the first before they be come to the last, & namely whē they do sing in set Musick? Wher∣in it appeareth plainely, that the song of the Ro∣maine Church hath bene vsed more to feede the bodily eares, then the soule and the spirit, and to serue men for delectation and pastime, as doe their belles, and their organs. For there is al the profite which commeth of them, which consi∣steth in sound which vanisheth in y^e aire. Againe, they call lowe Masses such as are not said with song, but onely with a soft voice. And albeit that there be very fewe which can vnderstande any thing of it throughout the whole masse, yet not contented therewith, they do also speake it more softly, when they come to their secretes and to their Cannon, and therein they doublely trans∣gresse, not onely the lawe of God, [Note.] as I haue al∣ready proued by the testimonie of S. Paul, but al∣so the humane and Imperiall lawes. For the Emperour Iustinian, which raigned about the yere 528. did make a lawe expressedly for that point, the which he grounded vpon the sentence of S. Paul, which I haue already alleadged, takē out of his first Epistle to the Corinths.* 1.18 The same lawe commaundeth all ministers of the

Church to speake so loude and so plaine, espe∣cially in the administratiō of the Sacraments, that all the people may heare and vnderstande it, and make answere, So be it, to that which shalbe there spoken. He doth not commande thē that they should speake in a language vnder∣stoode of al men, for so much as yet at that time they did alwayes so according to the example of the auncient Church: but onely so to speake and pronoūce, to the end that they might be the bet∣ter vnderstoode of all men: the which thing had bene to no purpose at al, if speaking in such sort, the speach had not bene knowen and vnderstood of all men. Wherefore in commāding the fame, hee presupposeth that which already was, to witte, that the language was knowen and vn∣derstoode of all men. Seeing then that in that respect the masse is repugnant to all lawe as well diuine as humaine, in deede if there were none other but this onely point to be blamed, we haue iust cause to cōdemne it, and to require reformation of the same.

Chapter .xiii.

Of the application of the Sacramentall words in the Masse, and whether they should be spoken either to those which do there as∣sist, or els to the bread and to the wine of the same, and whether the signes of the sa∣craments

may be the signes of them or no, beside their true and proper vse.

THE last point of the same very purpose, which concerneth yet the wordes of y^e masse, is, that beside that which I haue already shewed to be worthy of blame in the pronunciation of them, there is yet this very foule faulte, and con∣trary to all reason, to witte, that in steade of de∣claring the wordes of the supper to the people assistant at the masse, and in speaking them vnto them, to cause them to vnderstand them, to the end that they should be taught by them, accor∣ding to the cōmaundemēt which the Lord hath giuen by Saint Paul, they speake them to the bread and to the wine which are vpō the Altar, and do pronounce them ouer them. And there∣fore the priest is turned towardes them, & hath his backe towards y^e people, to whom he should speake, and deliuer his wordes to teach and in∣struct them in the vnderstanding of the doctrine belonging to this sacrament, and in the myste∣ries and secretes which it conteineth. But in steade of doing this, he representeth them to the people by gestures, countenances, and diuers ceremonies, and oftentimes by so foolishe and doultish countenances, as are those of a very Iugler. Therefore I know not for what cause a man may not saye as well of a Priest, that he

goeth to doe, as well as to saie, Masse. For he hath there as much to doe as to saie. For th•• like cause, men might as well say, Let vs go t•• see, as well as let vs go to heare masse. For th•• assistance doe there oftentimes see more the•• they do heare, & namely in y^e Iowe masses, wher•• in they do plainely declare, that they do very it vnderstande,* 1.19 both the nature, and the vse as wel•• of the word of God as of the Sacraments. Fo•• the word whereupon they are grounded, is no•• there set forth to be spoken to the signes there of, but to chose persons to whom both the one 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the other should be administred, to witte, as wel•• the worde as the signes, or otherwise the sacra∣mentes should be no sacraments. For they are no sacramentes being out of their proper vse, for so much as they are onely ordeined thereun∣to. And therefore,* 1.20 the water is not the water o•• Baptisme, nor a signe, nor consequently the sa¦crament thereof, but so farre foorth as it is ioy∣ned with the word of Iesus Christ, by the which it is dedicated and cōsecrated to that vse, and so being applied to those persons, which men do•• baptize,* 1.21 according to his commandement. Th•• very like is of the bread and of the wine of th•• supper. For they can no more be y^e signes there∣of, then may the water of baptisme, if being ioyned together with the word of Iesus Christ, whereby they are dedicated and consecrated to

this sacrament, they be not giuen and distribu∣••ed to those which should bee partakers of the same: as it doth appeare by the expressed words of Iesus Christe, in that which he saieth of both the signes, Take ye & eate ye. Likewise,* 1.22 Take ye and drinke all ye. For it is playne that these wordes may not be spoken either to the bread, or to the wine, but onely to those persons which might vnderstande them, and execute the com∣mandement that Iesus Christ gaue vnto them by the same. For the bread and the wine can nei∣ther eate or drinke them selues.

Chapter .xiiii.

That the wordes of the Supper appertaine not to such as are capable thereof, and what fault the Romaine priestes doe committe in that behalfe.

THis notwithstanding, it is to them that the priest doth speake and deliuer their wordes, and not at all to those which do assiste as well at their Masse as at their Supper, the which they do administer seldome times to the people. No more may they be deliuered also to beastes, for so much as they can not vnderstand them, as al∣so because the sacraments of the Lord were not ordeined for them, the like may we say of all o∣ther creatures, which are not partakers, either

of sense or vnderstanding. Wherefore if they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 spoken to others then to such as are capable 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this sacrament, which may vnderstand them 〈◊〉〈◊〉 may obey to that which Iesus Christ comma••¦deth thē thereby, it is a meere mockery, whe••••¦by the intent and purpose of Iesus Christe•••• wholy ouerthrowen. [Note.] And if these wordes whi•••• conteine the commandemēt that he gaue in t•••• supper to all the faithful, ought not to be addr••••¦sed but to those which are capable thereof, t•••• very like is of those of the promise, which f••••¦loweth this commaundement. For when Ies•••• Christ saieth, This same is my body, and this 〈◊〉〈◊〉 my blood, and that which foloweth, he addresse•• no more his words to the bread and to the wi•••• then when he saieth of them, Take and eate y•••• but addresseth them to those in deeds, to who•• he speaketh the first. Wherefore, seeing th•••• there is both commandement and promise, a•••• that the promise is made, euē to those to who•• the commandement is giuen, and that the Lo•••• declareth thereby the cause and the ende, for 〈◊〉〈◊〉 which he giueth this commandement, it is e•••••• to iudge, that the promise doth no lesse belo•••• vnto them then doth the commandement, a•••• appertaine not at all to the bread & to the wi•••• From whence it followeth also that both 〈◊〉〈◊〉 one and the other belong vnto them, & that th•••• ought to vnderstand them, and are not spokē

••he bread and to the wine, which can not vnder∣••tand or comprehend either the one or the other.

Chapter. xv.

Of the office as well of the ministers as of the Christian people in the supper: and of the fault which the priestes and the Romaine Catholiques do cōmitte against the same in their Masse.

WHen then the Lord doth say, Take ye, and eate ye, and then expoundeth by the pro∣••ise which foloweth this commandement, the ••ause of the commandement, he admonisheth as ••ell the ministers as the people, of that which ••oth the one and the other ought to doe in the ••upper. As touching the ministers, their office is ••o aduertise the people both of the commaunde∣ment, and of the promise, and of that which they ••••ught to do according to the one and the other, ••nd what it is that they ought to attende. And y^e ••ffice of the people is to be obedient to y^t which ••s commanded them, and to beleeue the promise which is made vnto them. Then if the mini∣••ters do not this office, they are sacrilegious, in ••s much as they do steale and hide the worde of God frō his people, which is so holy & sacred a ••hing. Wherfore they may be wel placed amōg ••he false prophets, whom the Lorde accuseth by ••eremie, to haue stolen his word frō his people.* 1.23

They are in like forte very open rebels to Ie∣sus Christ.* 1.24 For seeing that they ought to repr••∣sent his person in the administration of the si••∣per and of al sacramentes, it must in any wise b•• that they do that which he commandeth them t•• do, and that they follow his example. For if the do otherwise and contrary thereunto, they ma•• not be called the ministers of Iesus Christe bu•• onely by a wrong title. Nowe it is certaine tha•• he commanded them to do in his remembrance the very same which he then did. And what is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that he then did: [Note.] he as minister addressed hi•• worde to his disciples to whom he administre•••• his supper, and forthwith distributed vnto then the signes thereof, which he commandeth the•• to take. Wherefore if the priests do not the lik•• in their masse & in their supper, wherein they sa•• they do represent as ministers, the person of I••∣sus Christ, they do mocke both Iesus Christ an•• his poore people. Nowe it is plaine that in the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 masse, they do neither the one, ne yet the other From whence it followeth very well, that th•• same can not be the supper of Iesus Christ, fo•• so much as they do so great a wrong therein, a•• well to him as to all Christian people. For in h••••∣ding and stealing the worde which ought to b•• declared vnto them, and in not distributing at a•• that which is commāded them to distribute vn∣to them, they do dishonour Iesus Christe in di••∣obeying

him: & also do great wrong to his peo∣••le, in not administring vnto them that which ••hey ought to administer vnto thē.* 1.25 And as they ••aile in this behalfe, euen so the people doe not ••heir dutie, if they wil not receiue the word nor ••he signes, when they are duely and sincerely ••dministred vnto them. For therein they shew ••hem selues rebels against God. [Note.] And if neither ••he one nor the other be presented and admini∣••tred vnto them, and that they care not at al, but ••re contented to be depriued eyther in part or in ••ll, they yeeld them selues then without excuse, ••••asmuch as they declare thereby, that they doe ••ot greatly care for the glory of god, nor for his ••••luation, and chiefely when they may haue the ••••eane to haue y^e right and full administration ••f the sacraments.

Chapter xvi.

Of the differēce and distinction that the Ro∣maine doctors do make in thapplicatiō of the sacramental wordes of the sacramēts, aswel concerning the signes of them, as the persons which are capable thereof: and of the foundation of their transsubstanciati∣on which they ground vpon the same.

••Eing thē that it is so, it is easie to iudge, howe foolish and ful of filthie ignorance, the distinc∣tion

and the difference that the Romaine do••¦tors doe make betwene Baptisme and the su••¦per, and their other sacraments, is, touching t•• applying of the wordes and of the signes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 them. For they say that in baptisme the sacr¦••mentall wordes are addressed to the perso•• which they baptize, [Note.] and not at al to the matt•••• of baptisme, to wit, to the water which is th•• signe thereof, but it is contrary in the suppe•• forsomuch as the sacramentall wordes are a¦dressed to the matter thereof, to wit, to y^e brea•••• and to the wine which are the signes, and n•• at all to the persons: from whence they do co¦clude the conuersion of the bread and of th•• wine into the bodie and bloud of Iesus Chri•••• according to their doctrine of transsubstanci••¦tion. By meane whereof they doe affirme, tha•• for that cause, the bread and the wine consecr••¦ted after their maner, are no more bread an•• wine, but are the very body and bloud of I••¦sus Christe, and the holy Sacrament of th•• altar and of the supper of the Lorde, yea eue•••• out of the accion and vse of the sacrament: Th•• which thing they dare not affirme of the w••¦ter of the baptisme.* 1.26 For albeit that they hau•• blessed and consecrated it after their maner, an•• that they doe reserue it in their fonts for th•• vse of baptisme, and that they doe pronounce th•• sacramental words thereof in thadministration

yet for al that they hold it neither for sacrament, nor for signe of baptisme; but in the very accion and vse thereof, to witte, when it is applied to the persons that men doe baptize.* 1.27 But if they graunt vs this point concerning baptisme, why make they so great difficultie to graunt vs the same concerning the supper? For haue they more expresse commandement of Iesus Christ to administer the water in Baptisme, then the bread and the wine in the supper, which are the signes? I say yet further, that it is so, that they haue a more expresse commandement to distri∣bute the bread and the wine of the supper,* 1.28 then to administer the water of the Baptisme. For where is it that they shal be able to find that Ie∣sus Christ hath said so expressely of the water of Baptisme, Take ye, baptize ye, and be ye bapti∣zed, as he hath plainely spoken of the bread & of the wine of the supper, Take ye, eate ye, Take ye, drinke ye, yea euery one of you. And to whō did he speake these woordes following, to wit, This same is my bodie, & this same is my bloud, but euen to those very men to whom he spake y^e wordes going before, as I haue alreadie decla∣red, & to whom he gaue commandement to eate y^e bread and to drinke the wine, which he brake & distributed vnto them for signes of his body and of his bloud:

Chapter xvii.

Of thapplying of the sacramentall wordes t•• the signes of the sacraments and of the cō¦secration of them.

THey may not then at all alledge, that they d•••• better agree with y^e matter of y^e bread and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the wine in the supper, then with that of the w••¦ter in Baptisme, and y^t it hath not equal respe•••• to the persons, aswell in the one sacrament as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the other.* 1.29 Wherefore to speake properly, the•• must be referred in both the sacramēts aswel 〈◊〉〈◊〉 y^e signes as to y^e persōs, to whom they ought 〈◊〉〈◊〉 be administred, but it is euer in the respect of th•• persōs. For it should be to no purpose that the•• were pronounced in secret, and in their absenc•• For that should be more like to a charme & a•• enchantment, then to a sacramēt. For the ma••¦ter which is taken for the signes in all sacr••∣ments, cannot be the signes,* 1.30 if the same be n•••• dedicated and consecrated thereunto by t•••• worde of God, by the which they are made h••¦ly and sacred signes, where as before they we•••• but simple and common matter. And therefo•••• there is so great difference betweene that th•••• it was,* 1.31 and that that it is after that the word 〈◊〉〈◊〉 added vnto it, as there is betwene a piece of s••¦uer before it be stamped, and that that it is aft•••• the coyning thereof hauing imprinted in it 〈◊〉〈◊〉

marke of the prince, the which gyueth vnto it his estimation and value: It hath also like dif∣ference, as hath the waxe,* 1.32 whereof men make a ••eale, before it be printed, and after that it is printed hauing receiued the forme by the Im∣pression of the seale, it is then no more simple waxe as before, but the true seale of the prince. For that cause the rod the which Moyses held ••n his hand,* 1.33 keeping the sheepe of Iethro his Father in law when God appeared vnto him in ••he bush, is afterwarde called the rodde of God, when God had commaunded him to vse y^e same ••n his ministerie, and in the miraculouse works which were done by the same.* 1.34 And in this sorte must we vnderstād that which Saint Augustine ••aid speaking of baptisme, The word is ioyned ••o the element, and it is made a sacrament. He ••nderstandeth by the element the water of bap∣••isme, the which is dedicated to be the signe ••hereof by the worde which is ioyned vnto it, ••he which is not ioyned vnto it, but to be vn∣••erstood of those vnto whom it belongeth, and ••o vnderstand by the same to what end it is ••••yned to the signes. [Note.] And albeit that the li∣••e children can not vnderstand it in their bap∣••••sme, as those which are of greater age doe, yet ••or all that the same is not wrong applied, in ••s much as it may be vnderstood as well by ••••eir Godfathers and Godmothers, as by

those which doe present them and assist at thei•• baptisme, for so much as it is not founded onel•• vpon the person of the infants, and vpon thei•• faith, but also vpon the faith of their Godfather•• and Godmothers, and of the whole Church, i•• as much as it is grounded vpon the alliaunc•• that God hath made with the faithful, because h•• hath also comprehended in the same, their chi••¦dren, saying that he would be their God and th•• God of their children.* 1.35 Wherefore seing y^t bap∣tisme is the sacrament thereof in the Christia•• Church, as the Circumcision was in th•• Church of Israel, the children of the Christian•• are no lesse capable of Baptisme thē were thos•• of the Iewes of circumcisiō, forsomuch as ther•• is one very foundation and one very reason i•• them both touching this point. And therefor•• such is the consecration which is done to th•• water in baptisme, whereby the same is con¦secrated to that vse. [Note.] We then see here, how that the worde whereupon the same is groun¦ded, hath aswell relation to the matter of bap¦tisme in respect of the bloud of Christ, accordin•• to the testimonie of Saint Augustine, as hau•• those of the supper to the bread & to the wine, i•• sort that y^e water is no lesse consecrated by thi•• meane to be the signe of baptisme, then is th•• bread & y^e wine in y^e supper to be signes thereof For a man may say in very trouth thereof, th••

••ame that Saint Augustine hath said of the wa∣••er of baptisme. For there is like reason in both, ••n as much as there is none other meane, wher∣••y the matter which is taken to be the signe ••f the Sacraments, may be dedicated and con∣••ecrated to that vse, otherwise then by the word of God, whereof they are signes and sacramēts. Beholde here then that which the auncients did ••all here properly, Consecration.

Chapter xviii.

Of the chaunge and conuersion of the signes of the sacraments into the thing signified by them, according to the vsage of the auncient Church, and of the doctors of the same.

ANd when they speake of the chaunge & con∣uersion of the signes of the sacraments into ••he thing which they do signifie, they doe vnder∣stand this chaunge of the vsage of them,* 1.36 for the which cause they doe also chaunge their name, taking the name of the thing which they sig∣nifie, in contemplation and in respect of this chaunge of the vse, and not at all of the chaunge of one substance into an other, to wit, of the substance of the signes, into that of the things which they doe signifie. For if there were such 〈◊〉〈◊〉 chaunge of substance, by the vertue of the

sacramental wordes and of the consecration o•• the signes, it should necessaryly then come t•• passe, that the same should be in al sacraments, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not more in the one then in the other: fors•••• much as there is none at all that may be sacra¦ments without consecration and without sacra¦mentall wordes, and they haue al this commo•• together, and the like reason is in them all, con¦cerning this point.* 1.37 Wherefore the Romayn•• transsubstantiators haue no ground of reason to affirme that there is more transsubstanciati•••• in the supper, by chaunge of the substance of th•• signes, into the thing signified by the vertue o•• the consecration and of the sacramental words then in all the other sacraments. And therefor•• if they would that we should beleeue them, the•• must then proue their sayings by other testimo¦nies then them selues, for so much as they do•• ouerthrowe the whole nature of sacraments by their doctrine. For the bread and the wine o•• the Supper, can not be made the signes there of, but onely by the vertue of their consecratio•• and of the sacramentall wordes by the which they are consecrated to that vse. For as we hau•• alreadie heard by Saint Augustine, the word•• must be alwaies ioyned to the element, befor•• that it may be made a sacramēt. Now it is ther•• then ioyned, when the bread and the wine whic•• are taken of the elements of this world, are ap¦plied

to the vse of the supper, and this applicati∣on is made by the consecration and by the sacra∣mental wordes, when they are pronounced and declared in the administration of the Supper in the same sort as Iesus Christ did pronounce and declare them, and commanded the same to be done according to his example. Behold then here al the conuersion and all the transsubstan∣ciation which may be in the supper, aswel as in the other sacraments.

Chapter xix.

Whether euery chaunge carry with it conuer∣sion of one substance into another: and what difference there is betwene chaunge and transsubstanciation: and of the double chaunge of the signes which should be re∣quired in the supper, if the doctrine of trās∣substanciation were true.

ANd therefore when the auncient doctors did speake of chaunge and conuersion of the signes into y^e same, they vnderstood none other, as I haue shewed and proued very plainly, and by good testimonies of the auncient doctors thē selues in other treatises of mine. For euery chaunge and euery conuersion of one thing in∣to an other carieth not with it at all transsub∣stanciation of one substance into an other. For there may be chaunge, without conuersion of

substance. But conuersion of substance can not be without chaunge. We may then say y^t wher•• there is transsubstanciation by conuersiō of sub∣stance, there is there chaunge. But there is not alwaies transsubstanciation and conuersion of substance, where there is chaunge. Wherefore there is as great difference betwene chaunge & transsubstanciation, as is betwene the general & the speciall. For chaunge is the generall which comprehendeth vnder it transsubstanciation, but transsubstanciation doth not comprehend in it chaunge, forsomuch as his signifiration is more ample (as that of chaunge, of transmutation and of conuersion) then that of transsubstanciation. For, all these names do cōprehend other kindes of chaunge and of conuersion, then of one sub∣stance into an other. For as there is chaunge of substances, so is there also chaunge of accidents, to witte, of qualities, of time, of places, of habits and such other like thinges, according to their natures, and to the predicaments vnder y^t which they are comprehended, as the Logicians distin∣guish them.* 1.38 Our regeneration is not without chaunge, which is wrought in our own persōs. But it is not at all by conuersion of y^e substance of our bodies nor of our soules into others, or into any other substance, but it is in qualitie, which is, from vice into vertue, by the chaunge & renewing of the olde Adam, & of the olde man

into the new.* 1.39 And therfore if there be any chaūge in the supper, touching the matter of the signes thereof, it must then be considered of what kind this chaunge is, and in what predicament it must be sought, if we will speake as becōmeth Logi∣cians, and if there be chaunges, either of sub∣stance or of qualitie, in asmuch as the matter of the signes thereof is otherwise qualified, when it is applied to that vse, then it was before. I haue alreadie declared & proued, that there can be no more chaunge of one substance into an other, then there is in all other sacraments, be∣cause of the reasons that I haue alreadie allead∣ged, taken aswell of the nature of them, as of the testimonies of the word of God, whereupon they are grounded. And if there were such a chaunge,* 1.40 it must needes be that it should be in 2. sortes, to witte, the one, by the which y^e bread and the wine should be appointed to be the signes of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ: and the other to conuert the substance of the bread and of the wine into his body and bloud, after that they should haue bene made y^e signes thereof, by the first consecration, and by y^e first chaunge which should haue bene made by y^e same. And by this meane it would come to passe that there should be 2. consecratiōs,* 1.41 and 2. sorts of sacramental words. The first, to conse∣crat & cause y^e bread & the wine to be the signes:

and then the second, to conuert them afterward into the bodie and into y^e bloud of Iesus Christ: or else it must be, that the same very woordes should do both at one instant. And if the same myght be done in the supper, there is no rea∣son, why it should not be done also in the other sacraments, for the reasons which I haue alrea∣die declared, and chiefely in those in the which y^e holy Ghost hath vsed like maners of speach as in the supper. [Note.] We say thē that there is no more chaunge of the substance of the signes thereof, then there is in those of the other sacramēts, & y^t there is none other at al but in the vse which cō∣sisteth in this, that the matter which is taken for the signes of the sacraments, is applied and ser∣ueth to another vse, and an other end then his did before that time. And if there be none other chaunge in y^e supper of the Lord, there can then be none other in the masse, if it be his true sup∣per. And if it be not his true supper, it is not then a sacramēt of the Lord, but is rather a kind of magike and of sorcerie.

Chapter xx.

Of the ground of the errour of transsubstanci∣ation, & of the absurdities which followe the same, and of the application of the sacramental words to those persons which are capablc, and what faith there is there required.

BUt the Romaine doctors, hauing not wel vn∣derstood y^e meaning nor y^e maners of speach of the auncient doctors, haue taken them for a chaunge of one substance into an other in stead of taking them for the chaunge which is in the vse thereof.* 1.42 It is no maruaile at all if they be fallē into that errour, seing that they haue so il vnderstood the nature of the sacrament of the supper, that not only they haue conuerted it in∣to a sacrifice in their masse, but also they haue made it a sacrament of the altar, the which they accompt for a sacrament, yea when it is out of y^e vse therof. Wherfore seing they know not what the true vse of the supper is, no more haue they well vnderstood what was the chaunge of the signes in the same, in respect of their proper vse. For that cause euen as they haue chaūged their vse into an other wholly newe and straunge, by their doctrine and inuention, euen so haue they found out an other newe sort of chaunge, of the substance of the signes of the supper, into the substance of the thing signified by them, against the doctrine and the vsage of al the aun∣cient Church. This ignorance and newe inuen∣tion hath beene the cause of great and filthie er∣rours and abuses of the transsubstanciation, and of the infinite absurdities that the same draw∣eth after it. We must then first note, [Note.] in what sort the word is adioyned to the matter of y^e signes,

to know in what sort the same is dedicated and consecrated to that vse by the same word, accor∣ding to that which I haue lately alleadged of Saint Augustine, saying, The word is ioyned to y^e element, and it is made a sacrament. And then we must goe on further, to consider howe the same worde is applied to the persons, to whom the sacraments are administred, and for whose cause the matter of the signes and of the sacra∣ments is dedicated and consecrated to that vse whereunto it serueth. For if the word were not ioyned and applied, but onely to the matter of the signes, the which Saint Augustine calleth element, because it is taken of these earthly ele∣ments, it should not be conuerted into a sacra∣mēt by the conuersion of the vse whereunto it is conuerted: but should alway remaine in his first qualitie, & should not be qualified, as it is when that it is applied to the vse of y^e sacraments. For God hath not giuē the word to man to declare y^e same to insensible creatures, [Note.] & to pronounce it ouer thē. For y^t belōgeth to magiciās, forcerers, charmers, and enchaunters, which doe abuse it cōtrary to the true vse therof. For it is their cu∣stome, so to applie their charmes & enchantmēts & to pronounce thē secretly & with a whispering voice,* 1.43 & to babble & mumble thē without vnder∣standing, as also Esay doth witnesse. And there∣fore Saint Augustine sayeth yet very well, that y^e

element is made a sacrament by the word which is ioyned vnto it, not somuch because it is spokē, but because it is beleued. He doth not deny, but y^t the element is made a sacrament by the word, because it is spokē & pronounced, but it is chiefly because y^t men do beleue y^e same word. For men could not beleue it, if it were not declared vnto thē which should & ought to beleue it. But his only meaning is, y^t it is not enough to speake & pronounce it, but y^t it must also be receyued by faith. From whēce it foloweth also, that it must needes be y^t it be declared & vnderstood. For o∣therwise men could not beleue, cōsidering that faith can not be faith w^tout the vnderstanding & y^e knowledge of the things, which are set forth vnto men by the worde of God. [Note.] And thereby it is easie to iudge, that the word is not of effect in the sacraments, & that they cannot be made sa∣cramentes by the same, if it be not declared to those which are capable of it. For the signes cā¦not beleeue y^e word, wherefore it is not for their cause y^t the word is ioyned vnto them: but in res∣pect of those vnto whō they are administred, to y^e end that they may know what y^e vse of them is, & to what ende they are administred vnto them. For hee that should pronounce the wordes only ouer the signes, in steade of declaring them to the people, to whom the sacramentes doe be∣long, it should be to conuert the sacramentes

into a maner of sorcerie, of charmes and of en¦chantments against the expressed word of God▪

Chapter xxi.

Whether the Sacraments and their vertue do depend as well of the persons which doe administer them, as of those to whom they are administred.

BVt they may replie that if it were so as I say,* 1.44 according to the testimonie of Saint Au∣gustine, the sacraments, and the vertue and the efficacie of them should depend more vpon the faith of thē, to whom thei should be administred, then vpon the ordinance and the word of God, whereupon they are builded.* 1.45 Whereunto I an∣swer that so farre it is of from me so to cōclude, that I say yet further, that they doe not one∣ly not depend at all vpon those vnto whom they are administred, neither yet vpon the very mi∣nisters which do administer them. For albeit y^e minister were as vnfaithfull as Iudas was, yea thorowly an Atheist, and of the worst conscience of the world, y^t notwithstanding the sacraments which they should administer, should be no lesse sacraments, then if a very Apostle of Christ, or some other very holy personage should admini∣ster them, prouided that such a minister should be called by lawful vocation, according to the

order which the Lorde hath ordained in his Church, and that he should administer the sacra∣mentes in the very true maner that they haue bene ordeined by the Lorde, without adding or diminishing, changing, disguising and counter∣faiting in any thing which belongeth to their proper nature and substance. [Note.] For if their vertue and efficacie should depend of him that doth ad∣minister them, in what case should the Churche be? For what assurāce might she haue, whether the sacraments which are administred vnto her be true sacraments or no, if it were so that their assurance were builded in such matter vpon the faith of her ministers? For shee is not God, which only knoweth the hearts whereby to dis∣cerne them. Wherefore, if her assurance be not better grounded then vpon the faith of the mi∣nisters, it must nedes be that she should remaine alway in doubt, for so much as she can not iudge of the hearts of men, nor consequently of y^e faith or vnfaithfulnesse which may be in them. From whence it should folowe, that she should alway remaine in doubt, & consequētly that she should not receiue any sacrament in assured faith, for so much as faith is so contrary to doubt, as is trust and assurance. Wherefore they may in no wyse agree together. And therefore in such a case, the Churche needeth not but to haue a regarde to three pointes. The first is,* 1.46 whether the Lord did

ordeine the Sacramentes which are set foorth vnto her in his name. The seconde, whether hee that doeth administer them, bee called by lawfull vocation to that charge to administer them. The thirde, whether hee doeth admi∣nister them according to the ordinaunce of the Lorde or no, or whether hee doe disguise and peruerte them, or whether hee doe administer others in the steade of them. For as there ought nothing to be attempted in the Churche without lawfull vocation, euen so the onely vo∣cation is not sufficient, if the charge by her com∣mitted, be not executed according to the Lordes ordinance. For albeit that a man shalbe called by lawfull vocation, hee may very well straye afterwarde, and may passe the limittes thereof, and doe cleane contrary to his duetie, but hee shall not bee allowed therein.* 1.47 And therefore it behoueth euery man herein to take good heed that hee be not deceiued. For if the Minister doe deliuer any other woorde, then that which God hath reuealed vnto vs in his holy scrip∣tures, and any other Sacramentes then those which the Lorde hath ordained, and in any other sorte, hee may well boaste of his calling, for that shall not at all let, but that hee is a false mi∣nister, and a seducer in that behalfe, and that those vnto whome hee shall administer, be not seduced and deceiued by him. For his voca∣tion

may not exempt him, but so farre forth as hee followeth the same, and not at all in that wherein he doeth contrary thereunto. On the contrarie, if he doe administer the woorde and the Sacramentes which hee ought to doe, and in such sorte as the Lorde hath commaunded, his infidelitie and wicked life shall not let, but that which is of God shall bee alwaye of God, and shall alwayes haue his vertue and his effi∣cacie in those which are made capable by him, because that, that which the Lorde hath orday∣ned, taketh his vertue and force of him,* 1.48 and not at all of the Minister which is but the instru∣ment, which of him selfe can doe nothing, but so farre foorth as the Lorde shall worke by him. And therefore the Gospell,* 1.49 which Iu∣das preached, was no lesse the Gospell then that which was preached by the other Apostles his fellowes; for so much as hee was called to the same ministerie with them. This notwith∣standing, Iesus Christe yet in those dayes sayde that Iudas was a Deuill. Hee was then a Deuill and an Apostle both together. An Apostle by meane of his vocation, and for so much as hee dyd execute it according to the charge that was committed vnto him, and a Deuill in respect of his hypocrisie, and of his infidelitie, couetousnesse and malice.

If then during the time that he was yet an A∣postle, hee should haue administred the supper, in such sort as Iesus Christ did ordeine and ad∣minister the same, it shoulde haue bene no less•• the Lordes supper, then if Saint Peter or some other of the Apostles had administred the same▪ On the other side, if Saint Peter him self, or any other of the Apostles, yea a very Angel, should administer it in that sort as it is at this day ad∣ministred in the Romaine Churche, and should saye masse as the Romaine priestes at this day•• there doe, yet could it not be the supper of th•• Lorde, nor acceptable or pleasaunt vnto God▪ for so much as his ordinance is there vtterly ••••uerthrowen: and in that respect could be no bet••ter then if Iudas had saide it.* 1.50 We must the•• consider not only the vocation of the ministers but also the execution of their charge. And whe••ther they doe both agree together, the rest whic•• may be in their person, bee it neuer so vitious may not hinder the vertue of the Lordes mi••••sterie. But if these thinges be there wanting, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 namely the second; [Note.] the case is altered. For if th•• Treasorer or receiuour of a Prince,* 1.51 doe deli•••• foorth false money in steade of good, the offi•••• whereunto he is called, can not make it oth•• then false money, because he doeth not execu•• the office faithfully, and doth chaunge the go•• money which he receiueth to distribute by th••

commaundement of his Lorde, into that which is not the same that he receiued to bee distribu∣ted. And by this meane they which shall haue re∣ceiued the same, shalbe deceiued and spoiled. On the other side, although he were wicked and vn∣iust, if he did distribute it good & such as he was commanded, the same coulde not let at all but that it should be good, & that they which should receiue it, should very well make their profite thereof. So much concerning ministers, & that which their ministerie may receiue of them. Let vs now speake of those to whom they are sent.* 1.52 If they doe administer that which they ought to doe, their ministery hath his vertue as wel in the respect of God, as in the respect of them selues. And as concerning those to whom they do ad∣minister them,* 1.53 they may in no wise make their profite of it, if they doe not receiue in faith that which is administred vnto them. For they can not cōmunicate with Iesus Christe, nor be par∣takers of his graces, the which he communica∣teth to his church, by the meanes of the ministe∣rie, which he hath ordained in the same, without hauing faith in him and his promises. Then if they haue true faith,* 1.54 they doe receiue with the signes the things signified by thē, but if there be no faith in them, they shall receiue nothing but that which they may receiue without the same, but not at all that which without the same they

may not receiue.* 1.55 Nowe they may well receiue the signes of the sacramentes without faith, be∣cause that they haue in their bodies and in their members the instrumentes whereby to receiue thē. But they may in no wise receiue the thing which they signifie, because that it is spirituall, and that they want the spirituall instrumentes, without the which no mā may receiue them: the which no man may haue but by the meane of faith.* 1.56 And for that cause Saint Augustine saith, that they doe in deede receiue the sacrament, by the which he vnderstandeth the signes, but not the thing of the sacrament, which is to saye, that which is signified by them. For he doth euen in that sort take the name of Sacrament, when he so speaketh, as it appeareth by that that he doth distinguish frō the thing signified by the same. For the sacrament is not a true sacrament,* 1.57 if it haue not alway these three things, to witte, the word of God, and the signes ordained by him, & the thing which they signifie. All these things neuer faile in y^e respect of God: but they which do abuse them, are the cause that it is not a sa∣crament vnto them, in as much as they doe re∣iect through their vnbeliefe, the grace which is offered vnto them by him.* 1.58 Wherefore the like happeneth vnto those to whom the sacramentes are administred, as to mē in respect of y^e Sūne, the which shineth well for all, but not to all. For

there are none but those which haue eies, that do receiue his light, the which he presenteth to all: but in the meane time, such as are blinde do not receiue it. For they haue not the instrumēt, with∣out the which they cannot receiue it. So stan∣deth it betweene the faithfull and the vnfaithful in respect of the ministery of the Churche, for it presenteth vnto all the benefites of God. And al∣beit that the faithlesse do not receiue them at al, that not withstanding the same letteth not, but that the ministery hath alway in it selfe his ver∣tue. But in the meane while it is not ordeined but to be exercised towardes those for whome it was ordeined, or otherwise it should not be a mi∣nisterie, and by consequence should not haue his vertue.

Chapter. xxii.

That the signes of the Supper may no more be Sacramentes out of the vsage thereof, thē that of Baptisme out of the time of Bap∣tisime.

TO returne againe then to the point where∣upon I was,* 1.59 I cōclude that as the water of baptisme cannot be the Sacrament, nor y^e signe of baptisme, but onely in the administration of the same, euen so is it of the bread and of the wyne in the Supper. For the sacramentall

wordes, both of the one and of the other sacra∣ment, haue no more respect to the matter of the signes, nor lesse to the persons which are ca∣pable in the baptisme, then in the supper: as S. Augustine hath very well vnderstoode it. For if he had saide of the supper onely, that the ele∣ment is made a Sacrament, when the worde is ioyned vnto it,* 1.60 y^e Romaine doctors might more iustly serue them selues with his testimonies to proue the difference which they make betweene the baptisme and the supper, saying that the sa∣cramentall wordes of baptisme haue regarde, and doe belong to the persons which men doe baptize, and not at all to the matter of the sacra∣ment, which is the water and the signe thereof: and that those of the supper haue regarde and do belong to the matter of the same, to witte, to the bread and to the wine and not to the per∣sons, as they do in baptisme.* 1.61 Whereupon they do conclude, that the bread consecrated by them is no lesse a sacrament, beeing kept in a boxe, pixte, or hutch, then when they doe administer it in their supper. And therefore they do alway cal it the sacrament of the altar, and the body of the Lorde, and the bodie of God, as well in their pixtes and hutches, as in the administration of their supper.* 1.62 And we on the contrary, doe saye and prone forth with by the very wordes of Ie∣sus Christe, that if it were so in deede, that the

bread and the wine should be transsubstantiated into the bodie and into the bloud of him, as the transsubstanciatours do affirme, yet for all that they can not make the same by their transsubstā∣tiation, if that forth w^c they do not distribute it, & that they be not communicated, as Iesus Christ hath done and commaunded. For they can not do that which he hath done and hath commaun∣ded to be done in that matter, doing the cleane contrary to that which hee hath done and com∣manded. For the minister can not haue the ver∣tue which the Lord hath giuen to the ministerie of his Apostles, and of their true successours, if it be not the very same ministery. Nowe it ap∣peareth plainly that it is not the very same mi∣nisterie, for so much as the ordinance & purpose of Iesus Christe, is there manifestly and wholy violated and ouerthrowen. For Iesus Christe declareth openly by the same, that hee hath not ordeined the bread and the wine, to be signes of the holy sacrament, but to the ende that they should be administred, distributed, and commu∣nicated in the same, according as he hath expres∣ly commaunded, saying, Take ye and eate ye. Likewise, Take ye & drinke ye. Who may then beleeue that Iesus Chrisse did giue such power as the Romane priestes doe there attribute, to these which do cleane contrary to his so expres∣sed ordinance and commandemēt: [Note.] For there is

not here question onely of their vocation, but also of the execution of their charge and office. For albeit that it were so that the vocatiō were in all things els very lawfull, yet for all that, do∣ing cleane contrary to the same, that which they do, may in no wise be alowed by God. And ther∣fore I demande of them,* 1.63 whether they be ordei∣ned & called to the ministery, whereof they do so glorye, either to preach the word of God, and to administer the supper, & the other sacramēts ac∣cording to the same, as the Apostles and their true successours haue done before them: or els to say masse, and to ouerthrowe in the same the whole institution of the Lord. If it be but to say masse, and to do onely that which they do in the same, I can not in that respect graunt, that their vocation nor the worke which they doe accor∣ding to the same,* 1.64 may be of God. Wherefore I do againe conclude, that albeit that the doctrine of their transsubstantiatiō were in the rest true, yet notwithstāding, it could not haue place out of the vse of the supper, & their bread and wine could be but bread and wine, and not at all the body and the bloud of Christe, except they were distributed and communicated, accordingly as he hath expressedly commaunded. And therefore I saye againe that so farre of is it that the testi∣monie which I haue alledged of S. Augustine, may establishe the distinction which the transsubstantiatours

doe make betweene Baptisme and the Supper (whereof I haue euen nowe made mention) that on the contrary it doeth cleane ouerthrowe it. For he sayd those wordes,* 1.65 speaking not at all of the Supper, but of Bap∣tisme, by the which hee doeth plainely-declare that the sacramentall woorde thereof, haue no lesse regarde to the signe which is appoynted vnto it, then those of the Supper haue to the bread and to the wyne. From whence it fol∣loweth, that if for that cause there bee transsub∣stantiation in the one, it is also in the other: for the sacramentall woordes are no lesse spoken of the one then of the other, to the persons which are capable of these Sacramentes.

Chapter. xxiii.

Of the true distinction and difference which ought to be had betweene Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord.

SEeing that I haue declared the abuse and the errour which is in the distinction and diffe∣rence that the transsubstantiatours do make be∣tweene the sacramēts of baptisme & the supper touching their signes, and the application of the same, I will touch briefly y^e true distinction and difference which must bee put betweene them,

taking the same of their proper nature and vse, And for the better vnderstanding of it, we ought first to consider what it is that is cōmon to them both, and then what it is that euery of them hath proper and speciall to it selfe.* 1.66 They both haue this common and generall, that they send vs to the death and to the sacrifice of Iesus Christe, and that they are ordained to the end that by the meane of them we may communicate with Ie∣sus Christe, and may be made partakers of his benefites. But because that God doth offer vnto vs diuers graces by him, of the which he would make vs partakers, he hath ordained two sacra∣mentes the better to represent vnto vs his prin∣cipall graces, the which do comprehende all the rest. For seeing that by sinne we are dead of spi∣ritual death,* 1.67 we must first receiue that life which is contrary to that death, as though we should rise from spirituall death to spirituall life, the which we receiue of the benefit of Iesus Christ, who bringeth vs that life, because he hath it in him selfe, as he him selfe doth witnesse, saying, I am the way,* 1.68 the truth, and the life. Likewise, I am the resurrection and the life. For we cannot attaine to the blessed resurrection and to eternal life, which wee waite for, but wee must first bee made partakers of this spirituall life, which Ie∣sus Christ by his death & resurrectiō doth bring vnto vs.* 1.69 And we can not be made partakers

thereof, if we be not planted and graffed into him, which is the new Adam, and the new man, and the newe stocke of mankinde, in the which we must be renewed, euen as we haue bene plā∣ted and graffed into the olde Adam, and into the olde man which is the olde stocke of mankinde, the which is altogether corrupted through sinne, wherefore we must needes be transported from this stocke into the other, if we wil be transpor∣ted from death to life. And to bring this trans∣portation to passe, we must die to our olde man, and must rise againe to our newe, and we must spoyle our selues of the first, and clothe vs with the second. And because that we can not finde this vertue in our selues, we must therefore take it of the death and resurrectiō of Iesus Christ, to the ende that we may be throughly renewed and made newe creatures. This grace, and this benefit of Iesus Christe, is called in the holy scripture Regeneration, because that we are re∣generated and borne againe as of newe by him, not bodily, but spiritually. For we haue already bodily life by our first natiuitie, the which wee hold of y^e stock of Adam. Wherefore we haue no neede of a second natiuitie, the which we do call new birth, & regeneration in respect of this life, the which we haue already, but in respect of the spirituall life, the which we receiue of y^e stock of the new Adam, & of the new man, as the stippes

and braunches which are graffed into a good tree, and as the vine braunches which receiue their life and nouriture of their stocke. For that cause Iesus Christe is compared to the stocke of the vine,* 1.70 and his disciples to the braunches ioyned to the stocke, and they which are not at al graffed nor ioyned together with him, are cō∣pared to the braunches that are cut off from the stocke.* 1.71 And therefore that this benefit is repre∣sented and communicated vnto vs by Bap∣tisme, and howe wee doe put off the olde man and put on the newe,* 1.72 Saint Paul saieth, that by Baptisme wee are dead and buried with Iesus Christ, into his death, and risen againe with him, and planted and graffed, and incorporated into him, and that all those which are baptized, haue put on Iesus Christ. And thus much con∣cerning the benefite of regeneratiō, and of bap∣tisme, which is the Sacrament and testimonie thereof, whereby the Lorde witnesseth vnto vs, howe that he doeth renewe and regenerate vs in his sonne Iesus Christe, into a newe life, and doth refourme vs to his image, by the vertue of his holy spirite, and doth adopte vs by the spirit of adoption, and doth aduowe and receiue vs for his children into his house, which is his Church. For the which cause we are baptized in y^e name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost. Thus much concerning the nature and 〈1+ pages missing〉〈1+ pages missing〉

〈1+ pages missing〉〈1+ pages missing〉 faults, and very apparant to those which vnder∣stand what sacraments are, and doe knowe the nature of them, and also that of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ, and of the vnion and the distinction of his diuine & humaine natures in the person of him. The first is, touching the maner of expounding the sacramentall wordes of the supper. The 2. concerning the signes of the same, and the abolishing of them. The 3. cō∣cerning the thinges that they signifie. For the first they giue to the sacramentall woordes, by Iesus Christ pronounced in the Supper, an exposition altogether newe and strange, which cannot in any wise agree with any kind of sa∣cramētal speach, that is in al the holy scripture, like vnto that which Iesus Christ hath vsed in the Supper. For first of a sacramentall propo∣sition, they wil make a natural proposition.* 1.73 By meane whereof they haue already ouerthrowne the nature of the Sacraments. For if I say of the bread of the Supper, This bread is the body of Christ, there is no apparance to take it naturally so, as when I say, Iesus Christ is man, and Iesus Christ is God: but this propo∣sition must be taken sacramentally, forsomuch as we must alwaies take the signification of y^e termes & wordes which men doe vse, according to y^e matter whereof men speake & y^e nature of y^e same. Wherfore if mē speake of natural things,

the wordes must be taken naturally, but if men speake of spirituall and sacramentall thinges, they must be vnderstoode spiritually and sacra∣mentally.* 1.74 If there be then sundry sortes of sa∣cramental speaches in the scripture, like to that which Iesus Christ did vse in the Supper, there is no reason to take them in one sense in some sacraments, and in an other cleane contrary in some others, for so much as the matter is al∣waies sacramentall, and the maners of speache alwaies like. And on the other side, it is a great fault to take the wordes in their proper and na∣turall signification, when they should be vnder∣stoode by figure, and that the meaning of them cannot be true otherwise, as they ought to bee vnderstoode chiefly for two causes in the speache of Iesus Christ in the Supper, which woordes are at this day in controuersie. The first is be∣cause that al other maners of sacramental spea∣ches like vnto this may not be otherwise vnder∣stoode, nor also diuers others which resemble them. The other is, that if they be expounded otherwise, there followe infinite absurdities, the which do sufficiently declare that such an expo∣sition may not agree with the meaning of the wordes of the Lorde. And that which more is, on which side soeuer the transsubstantiatours & their adherentes may turne them selues, they can neuer in any wise expounde these woordes

according to y^e very sense that they would giue them, but that they will bee constrayned to ac∣knowledge and receyue some figure, as I haue very amply declared all these matters in diuers other bookes. I say further also, that they shall not bee able to finde in all the holy Scriptures any maner of speach,* 1.75 which carieth with it trans∣substanciation and conuersion of one substance into an other, like to that that Iesus Christ hath vsed in his supper. Wherfore is it then that they will here disguise and transsorme the language of the holy Ghost by a new exposition, whereof they haue neither testimonie nor example in the whole scriptures, namely in the matter of sa∣craments, where they haue many to the con∣trarie: For albeit they say they will take the wordes of Iesus Christe simply and according to the letter, Yet for all that they doe it not when they doe expounde the meaning of them according to their doctrine. For Iesus Christe hath not spoken that which they say by their ex∣position.

Chapter ii.

Of the abolishing of the signes of the Supper, and of the things signified by them: and consequently of all the sacrament by the Romaine Transsubstanciation.

THe other fault which is cōcerning y^e signes, confisteth in that, that by their exposition, whereby they would establish transsubstancia∣tion, they doe abolish the material signes of the supper, conuerting them into the thing which they signifie, or at least they do confounde them both together, whereas they should be distingui∣shed the one from the other.* 1.76 For euen as a sa∣crament cannot be a true sacrament without the woord of God: no more can it be without material signes which are ioyned to that word, as seales thereof. Now if the substance of bread and wine were transsubstanciate and conuerted into that of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ, there should be there no more bread nor wine, & by consequent there should be no more materiall signes, forasmuch as there is none o∣ther but the bread and the wine. From whence it should also folowe, that there should be at all no sacrament.* 1.77 And so willing to conuert the signes into the thing which they signifie: they haue neyther y^e one nor the other. For in abo∣lishing the signes, they abolish also the thyng which should be signified by them.* 1.78 For it can not bee there offered nor communicated sacramentally, as it ought to be set foorth and communicated, if the meanes be taken awaye which the Lord hath ordayned to make vs par∣takers

thereof. And for to alleadge that the signes doe alwaies remayne signes albeit that they be conuerted into the thing which they should signifie, because that their accidents do alwayes remaine whole, the which do there re∣mayne for signes: that is not to satisfie y^e ques∣tion and the difficultie, but to make it yet grea∣ter. For as the accidents may not be without substaunce,* 1.79 no more may they be accidentes of substances, if they be not agreeable to their na∣ture. For albeit that a man may not see and perceyue the substances but by their accidents, it foloweth not for all that, that all accidents do agree with euery substance, but are attributed vnto them according to their nature, and distin∣guished as thei are: or otherwise al nature should be confounded in a marueilous cōfusion of sub∣stances and accidents.* 1.80 And further wee haue to note, that among accidents there be some that are so proper and natural to their substance whereof they be accidents, that they may not be separated, without corrupting the subiect which sustayneth them: in sort that when they shall be separated, it is no more y^t which it was when they were ioyned vnto it. And by this meane the bread & the wine may be no more bread and wine, if they haue not the colour, & the sauour, & y^e other qualities which are proper and naturall

vnto them. And if they cannot be that which they should naturally bee without their natural qualities and other accidentes,* 1.81 their qualities and accidents may much lesse be without their substance.

Chap. iii.

That the bread and the wine of the Supper can not be the true signes of the same, if they do not remayne alway bread & wine in their proper substance and nature: and that the transsubstanciators cannot couer their errour with a couer of miracle.

* 1.82FRom whence it followeth of two thinges, the one: which is, that the bread & wine remaine alwaies bread and wine, aswell after the pro∣nunciation of the sacramentall woordes, as be∣fore: forsomuch as they doe alwayes keepe their first nature, as all the senses may iudge, the which are not false: or els it must be that there is some illusion which deceiueth the senses, and that maketh the thinges to appeare otherwise then they are in deede: by meane whereof the signes should be false & not true signes. Where∣fore being false they could not be fignes of true things, for the trouth cannot be represented by a lie, nor the true by a false, forsomuch as there

must needes be a true correspondance betwene the signes and the thinges which they signifie. They must then confesse that the accidents are wholly without substance and without subiect, against the whole order of God and of nature, or els that the accidents of bread and of wine, be the accidents of the bodie & of the bloud of Ie∣sus Christ, and that the same body and the same bloud are the subiect and the substance of them. On which side soeuer they will take it, [Note.] they shal alwaies fall into marueilous absurdities. For they may not here alledge miracle,* 1.83 if that they will not by that meanes ouerthrowe the whole nature of the miracles of God, as by their doc∣trine they do ouerthrowe the whole order of na∣ture. For as the power of God may not be sepa∣rated from his wisdome, by the which he neuer employeth his power, but wisely, and keeping alwaies good order: euen so no more doth hee, be it that he worke naturally or supernaturally,* 1.84 but that he maketh that which he hath made, & that that which is, is the same in deede, that it is. For if it were otherwise, he should be against him selfe and against his owne woorkes. [Note.] And therefore albeit that he be almightie, yet for all that he doth not, neither also will he doe, that the bread and the wine shall be bread and wine, and that notwithstanding they shall not be at al, and that they are, & are not at all euen together

that which they are, and that he would that they should be. The which thing they should be, if the bread and the wine of the supper did keepe con∣tinually their former nature, as they do in deed, and the experience sheweth if: and yet for al that they should not hold their proper substance, without the which they could not haue nor kepe their naturall vertue, as in deede they do hold it, aswell after the consecration as before. And if they wil not confesse it, they must then needes confesse that the naturall senses which God hath giuen vs,* 1.85 doe deceyue vs, and that the bo∣dily and outward senses doe shewe false things to the spiritual and inward senses. And if it be so, there is then the woorke of God corrupted, and his order wholly peruerted. For euen as wee may not separate his wisedome from his power, no more may wee also separate his will, the which wee cannot knowe but so farre forth as he declareth by his worde. Nowe he hath not declared vnto vs by the same,* 1.86 that the bread which should be baked betweens two hote prons, should be conuerted into the body of his sonne Iesus Christ, by the vertue of cer∣taine wordes spoken ouer it, by the priests so appointed & qualified as they are in the Ro∣maine Church, nor that the same hath euer bene done, nor that it shall be done: as he hath decla∣red

that his sonne should take vnto him our flesh, and that he should be conceyued in the wombe of a virgine, of whom he should be borne and that he should be conuersant, not inuisibly, but visibly among men. Euen so is it of all the other articles of our faith.* 1.87 But of that of Transsubstanciation, there is no one Prophet, which hath euer prophecied any thing, nor A∣postle, no Euangelist that euer wrote any thing in such sorte as the transsubstanciatours doe ex∣pound it and set it forth. For this cause the true auncient Church, and the auncient doctors and diuines of the same by whose handes wee haue receiued al the symboles, which the Church yet at this day vseth, which doe conteyne the Arti∣cles of our faith, haue not set downe any thing touching this Transsubstanciation, nor no one of them which doe depend no not in the very symbole, the which the priestes doe recite and sing in their masse.

Chapter iiii.

That the doctrine of transsubstanciation can not be true, without spoyling of Ie∣sus Christe and his humaine nature.

NOw if they take their second point, where∣of I haue lately spoken, they redouble their faulte, for by that meane, they spoyle Iesus Christ of the proprieties,* 1.88 without the which his humaine nature cannot be a true humaine na∣ture, in sort that they giue him a humaine bo∣die, the which altogether and at one time shal∣be a humaine, and not a humaine bodie. For it cannot be a true humaine bodie, if it haue not al that which is proper to a true humaine bodie, and without the which it cannot be an humaine bodie, be it glorified or not glorified. For it must needes be alway that a bodie be a bodie (be it glorified or not) and not a spirite:* 1.89 and that it doe keepe alway his naturall proprieties, with∣out the which it cannot be a true bodie, and such as God hath created it, and would that it should be. For euen as the soule of man vnited to his bodie,* 1.90 cannot be a bodie, because that it is a spirite, but remayneth alway a soule and spirite: euen so the bodie cannot be the soule, because it cannot be a spirite: or els if it be con∣uerted into spirit, it is no more a bodie, as also the spirite is no more the spirite if it be conuer∣ted into bodie. The like is of the bodie and of the soule of Iesus Christe, and of his diuine and humaine nature, of the which euery one of them holdeth so continually his proprieties, that the one cannot be that which the other is. For al∣beit

that they be vnited together by personall vnion, yet for all that they remaine alway dis∣tinct in their vnitie, according to their proprie∣ties,* 1.91 and not confused in sort that the one cannot be the other: wherefore we may not say at all, that the diuinitie is the humanitie, or that y^e hu∣manitie is the diuinitie, nor that the one is con∣uerted into the other. For if there were such a conuersion, they should no more be that which they are, but should be chaunged into other na∣tures, which thing cannot be. For God can ne∣uer be but God:* 1.92 Wherefore he can not be con∣uerted into man, but he may well vnite man to him selfe, as he hath done in the person of his sonne Iesus Christ. In likewise man can not be conuerted into God, forsomuch as he is a creature, & that God which is the creator of all, cannot be created, but is without be∣ginning as he is without end and infinite: the which thing can not agree with any creature. From whence it foloweth that the Goddes which are created, and that haue had any be∣ginning, are no Goddes at all, but are onely creatures, or else illusions:* 1.93 And as the sub∣staunce of God cannot be conuerted into that of man, nor that of man into that of God, for otherwise God should not be God, nor man should not be man at all: Euen so ney∣ther

the one nor the other may be without his conuenient and naturall proprieties. For if the humaine nature haue the proprieties belonging to the diuine nature, it is no more humaine na∣ture, but diuine.* 1.94 In like sort, if the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ haue the natural pro∣prieties which doe belong to the bread and to the wine, as they haue indeed, if they haue their qualities, & accidents, & these same effects, they are not at all the body and the bloud of him, but bread and wine, remayning alwaies in their substance with their accidents.

Chapter v.

That the doctrine of transsubstanciatiō doth ouerthrow a great parte of the Articles of the faith and Christian religion, concer∣ning the worke of the redemptiō wrought by Iesus Christ.

THen euen as the transsubstanciators doe a∣bolish from the supper the true signes of the same by their transsubstanciation: euen so doe they take away the thinges signified by them, to wit, the body and bloud of Iesus Christ, in asmuch as they transfigure them into an other nature,* 1.95 spoyling them of their bodyly proprie∣ties

in such sort that they are no more a very body nor a very bloud, forsomuch as they haue not their naturall proprieties, but haue those of the bread and of the wine which should re∣present them, and should not be the thing it selfe, the which they should signifie. And by the same ineane they ouerthrowe all the Articles of our faith, touching the incarnation of Ie∣sus Christ,* 1.96 and his conception and natiui∣tie, his death, resurrection and ascension into heauen: for if he haue such a body as they at∣tribute vnto him in their masse and supper, it is not a true humayne body, in asmuch as it hath no thing at all of that which is required in a true humayne body, but onely that which is proper and naturall to the bread, if it be so that the bread be conuerted into the same. From whence it foloweth, nyther that it is not the same very body which was conceyued and borne of the virgine Mary,* 1.97 and which died, rose againe, and went vp into heauen: or else if it be the same very body, it was neuer a true body, neyther in the conception and nati∣uitie, nor in the death, resurrection and ascen∣sion: or else it was afterwarde chaunged, ey∣ther into an imaginatiue body, or into a spi∣rite, or into God, in sort that it is become infinite as God, and that it is euery where in his proper

essence and substance as God: or at the least y^t it is in many places at one instaunt, and that it hath no one qualitie nor quantitie agreeable to a humayne bodie: The which things can in no wise agree with the nature of a true body. And y^t which I do say of y^e doctrine of the transsub∣stanciators, may be also said of that of the con∣substanciators, who albeit they doe condenme transsubstanciation as we do, yet for al that they doe constitute a corporall presence of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ with the bread and with the wine in the supper, which is not greatly different from that of the transsub∣stanciators, and draweth after it as many absur∣dities, concerning y^e proprieties of the humaine nature of Iesus Christ.

Chapter vi.

That the doctrine aswell of the transsubstan∣ciators as also of the consubstanciators hath no certayne foundation vpon the wordes of Iesus Christ, and for what cau∣ses: and of the chiefe different which is betweene them and vs, touching the pre∣sence of Iesus Christ in the Supper.

IT may not then bee that the transsubstantia∣tours, nor also y^e cōsubstantiacors may bragge and glorye as they do, that they haue the expres∣sed

worde of Iesus Christe, who sayd,* 1.98 This is my body: and that their faith of transsubstantia∣tion or consubstantiation, is grounded vpon the expressed and certaine worde of God. For seeing that their faith doth ouerthrowe the true faith of the principall articles of the Christian doctrine and religion, which are very plaine & throughly certaine, it followeth then in deede, that it can not be a true faith as touching that point: and by consequent, it cannot bee builded vpon the word of God. For they may not bragge to haue it in their fauour, if they do not take it in his true sense, without the which it is no more the worde of God, but it is disguised and ouerthrowen. Now it appeareth euidently,* 1.99 that it is taken in an other then his owne true sense, when it is ta∣ken in such a sense as ouerthroweth the princi∣pal articles of the Christian faith: which are not grounded vpon any passage of the holy scrip∣tures that is not well vnderstoode, but vpon so many testimonies of the Prophetes and of the Apostles, and so plaine and euident, that there may remaine no ambiguitie or doubt to those which do beleeue the diuine letters. The which thing can not bee saide of the doctrine of trans∣substantiation, nor of consubstantiation, which haue no other ground, but vpon a wrong and euill vnderstanding & exposition of the wordes of Iesus Christe, the which doth plainely and

manifestly appeare to bee contrary to the true sense of the same, for so much as it is impossible to agree it,* 1.100 either with the other maners of sa∣cramentall speache of the scriptures, and with their liuely signification and exposition, or els with the nature, as well of the sacramentes as of the true bodie of Iesus Christe, or of all those articles of the faith, whereof I haue now made mention.* 1.101 For the exposition, which in matter of sacramētes can not agree with all those points, may not be true. On the contrary, that which disagreeth not at all, but doth very well agree with all these pointes, may in no wyse be reiec∣ted as false. Now we saye that the same of ours doth agree with them very well,* 1.102 in as much as it agreeth with all other the like passages of the scriptures, and like maners of sacramentall and figuratiue speaches, and with the natures of the sacramentes and of the signes of them, and with that of the body and of the blood of Iesus Christ, and with the articles of our faith. For we are not at all in controuersie with the trans∣substantiatours, nor with the consubstantiators, touching the wordes of the Supper, whether they be of Iesus Christe, and whether they bee true or no, and whether hee be present in the Supper or absent, and whether his body and his blood be there present and distributed and communicated or no: for wee all agree in all

these poyntes. But the different is onely in the maner of the presence and communication, to witte, whether it bee bodily, or spiritually, and whether the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ be there distributed,* 1.103 and eaten and drunken bo∣dily and naturally, or els spiritually, and sup∣pernaturally. We saye, that it is spiritually and supernaturally, by meane of the reasons which I haue already alleadged: the other saye, that it is bodily and naturally, which thing wee can not graunt them, if wee will not foorthwith graunt them al the absurdities whereof I haue made mencion, and a great nomber of other which folowe their doctrine.

Chapter. vii.

Of the adoration of the bread and of the wine, as well in the Masse as in their pixtes and boxes, and of the idolatric that there∣in is.

SO much touching the errour of transsubstan∣tiation, from whence there followeth yet an other very great & very vnsufferable, the which I set downe for the seconde, concerning the matter of transsubstantiation, and for the se∣uenth of the twelue, into which nomber I bring all the poyntes. This same is,* 1.104 concerning the worshipping of the bread and of the wine,

in stead of Iesus Christ the very sonne of God, This is an errour which yet draweth after it many other.* 1.105 The first is, that where the bread & the wine should be distributed in the masse, to those which be there present, as the Lorde hath commaunded that it should be done in the sup∣per, they doe onely set them out to shewe, lifting them vp on high, and causing them to bee wor∣shipped of euery one, as idols, through great su∣perstition and idolatrie: whose like neuer was since the beginning of the world, howe great so∣euer the blindnesse haue bene.* 1.106 For as Cicero himselfe witnesseth, there were neuer men that did beleeue or thinke, that that which they did eate was God. And there was neuer any people so beastly, which did thinke that the idols & the visible things which they did honour and wor∣ship, were really and essentially gods, but onely that they were remembrances and representa∣tions. But the idolatrie whereof I now speake, passeth on much further. For it contenteth not it self to cause the bread and the wine to be wor∣shipped and honoured as holy & sacred signes, ordeined to be remembrances and representa∣tions of the very body & blood of Iesus Christ, but as Iesus Christ him selfe in fleshe and bone, and man and God together.* 1.107 For they affirme, that there is no more bread nor wine, but that that which was bread and wine before the con∣secration,

is really and in deede Iesus Christe him selfe, which thing may not be, by meane of the reasons which I haue already alleadged. From whence it followeth,* 1.108 that the bread and the wine are there worshipped for gods, & that that same worshipping is a very idolatrie, and cleane contrary to the holy ordinaunce of the Lorde, and to that which he hath sayd and done, and commaunded in the institution and admi∣nistration of the same. For he commandeth ex∣presly,* 1.109 to doe that which he did in the remem∣brance of him, and not otherwise. Nowe hauing taken the bread & the wine,* 1.110 hee did not lift them vp on high, nor caused them to be worshipped by his disciples, before he did distribute them, but did distribute them to euery of thē, with expresse commandement, that they should take both the one and the other, & euen at the same very time, that they shoulde eate the bread and drinke the wine, euen as they did in deede. And if this can not be proued to be done, neither in their masse, nor in the very supper which they do administer to the people, there is thē lesser reason to reserue the bread in pixtes, caskets, cupbordes, and such like, not onely to cause it to bee worshipped as God, or to beare it about in procession in great pompe and solemnitie to that very ende, as the Persians did beare in time past their sacred fire,* 1.111 but also to coniure the time & the tempestes, and

the Deuils, and to vse them in such like super∣stitions, according as it falleth in their fantasie. For as I haue already heretofore shewed,* 1.112 albe∣it that it were so, that according to their doc∣trine of transsubstantiation, the bread were chaunged into the bodie of Iesus Christe, yet for all that, it coulde not haue place out of the vse of the Sacrament, by meane of the reasons that I haue already yelded.* 1.113 Nowe it is very true that there is no vse there, where the Sa∣crament is not administred: and that it is not administred there where it is not distributed with the woorde, to those which are capable of it. And if they doe applie the signes thereof to any other vse then to the same, for the which they are ordeyned, that vse is not lawfull: wherefore it may not bee taken for an vse, but shoulde bee reiected as an abuse, manifestly contrary to the woorde and ordinaunce of the Lorde. And on the other syde, if this abuse were not so great, yet so is it for all that, that this worshipping of the bread and of the wyne, and of their holy hostie, can not bee without putting them alwaye, which doe wor∣shippe them, in great daunger of Idolatrie. At the least it can not bee done in fayth, [Note.] for so much as it must needes bee that the worship∣pers remayne alwaye in doubt, touching the consecration of the priestes, for so much as ac∣cording

to their doctrine,* 1.114 there is no transsub∣stantiation, if the intent to consecrate be not ioy∣ned with the pronunciation of the woordes: and that there is no man that can iudge and bee assured of the purpose of the priestes, no more then they can of their fayth, onely God excep∣ted, which knoweth the heartes.* 1.115 Wherefore either they put them selues in daunger to bee idolaters, according to their owne very doc∣trine, worshipping the bread and the wyne, in steade of the body and of the blood of Iesus Christe: or els they must needes worship them with condition, the which can not bee voyde of doubt. From whence it followeth, that it can not bee in fayth, but onely in opinion: and by consequence it is sinne, seeing that whatsoeuer is not of fayth, and without the same,* 1.116 can not please God, but is sinne.

Chapter. viii.

Of the diuision of the signes of the Supper, and of the Sursum corda of the Masse, and of the signification of the same, and where∣unto it serueth at this present.

ANd on y^e other side, seing y^t the Lord hath or∣deined 2. signes in this sacramēt, y^e one may

not be separated from the other,* 1.117 but that his or∣dinance is there violated and ouerthrowen, con∣trary to his intent and his expressed commande∣ment. Now so it is, that the wine appointed to be that signe of the bloud, is separated from the bread which is appointed to be the signe of the body,* 1.118 not onely when the bread is reserued in their pixtes & boxes, all alone without the wine, but also in their supper, which they administer beside their masse, to them whome they call the Lay people. From whence it foloweth that this bread is not at all the sacrament of the supper, for so much as it is not applied to his true vse, according to the intent and expresse commande∣ment of Iesus Christ, but cleane contrary. And if it be not a sacrament of the supper, it can not be an other sacrament. For Iesus Christ hath not instituted any other, to y^t which he hath ap∣pointed the bread for a signe, but only this. And if it be not at all a sacrament,* 1.119 how may it be the body of Iesus Christ, & Iesus Christ him selfe, God and man? yea, in so many places at one in∣stant, as there be boxes, pixtes, cupbordes and caskets, in the which this bread is reserued and kept as a relique? Therefore I would gladly, that the transsubstantiators and Romaine doc∣tors should well consider, in all their worship∣pings that they doe to this bread, bee it in their masses, or in their pixtes, cupbordes and boxes,

or in their processions, to what purpose a litle before they do lift it vp in their masse, to cause it to be worshipped, they say and sing, Lift vp your heartes, which is as much to say, Sursum corda. For it is an exhortation to the Christian people, taken of the true ancient Churche,* 1.120 whereby the ministers did admonishe them, which should cō∣municate at the supper, not to stay them selues and rest vpon the visible signes of the same, but that they should lifte vp their heartes and their mindes on high, to heauenly and diuine things, represented by them, and to the Lorde which on∣ly can communicate those things, and will bee serued and worshipped in spirit and truth, as he him selfe witnesseth, and not in visible and cor∣ruptible things, nor in things base and earthly. For if the time be come, that he will not be any more worshipped, either in Ierusalem, or in the mountaine, no more will hee be worshipped be∣tweene the handes of the Romaine priestes, nor in their masses and boxes, cupbordes, pixtes, and caskets. For that cause after that this exhorta∣tion, Sursum corda, was giuen to all the assi∣stantes, they answered, Habemus ad dominum, which is to saye, we haue them vp to the Lorde, to witte, the heartes, the which they were exhor∣ted to lift vp on high. [Note.] For the same was spoken in a tongue vnderstoode of al. But to what pur∣pose serueth it now to sing in the masse, Sursum

corda, before the poore people, and the igno∣rant, which knowe not what men saye vnto thē, neither do they vnderstand at al the exhortation which is giuen vnto them, for so much as it is deliuered in Latin, and not in their owne lan∣guage?* 1.121 And although that it were deliuered vnto them in their owne language, saying, Lift vp your heartes on high, it coulde not serue them, but onely to make them lift them vp to the handes of the priestes, which holde and lift vp their hostie and their cuppe, euen as hye as their pixtes & boxes, wherin they holde their ho∣ly hostie inclosed,* 1.122 & no hygher at all. For seeing that they doe teache them there to seeke God & Iesus Christe our Lorde, they neede not to lift their heartes more high to worshyppe him in spirit and trueth, but rather that they doe abase them to the earth, where they shewe them their visible god, whereupon they thinke and rest. Wherefore they may very wel boaste thē selues, that they haue a god which they see, and hee seeth not them.* 1.123 But as for vs, we knowe no God created nor visible, but onely hee, which hath created all things, and is not him selfe created, and which is eternall and inuisible, the which doeth very well see vs, albeit that we see not him at all, for so much as his diuine na∣ture can not bee seene. And albeit that hee

made him selfe visible in his Sonne Iesus Christe, in whome hee hath declared him selfe, yet for all that, Iesus Christ would withdrawe his bodily presence from this visible worlde,* 1.124 to the ende that wee shoulde not seeke him any more in this base territorie, nor in corruptible things, but that wee shoulde seeke him in the heauens, where hee is at the right hande of the Father, to worshippe him there in spirit and trueth.* 1.125 For hee will not bee worshipped with any other worshippe then that, wherewith hee hath taught vs, that God must bee worshipped, seeing that hee is the cause for the which hee is worshipped, for otherwyse it should not be law∣full to worship him, seeing that that honour ap∣perteineth to none but to God onely.

Chapter. ix.

Of the auncientie of transsubstantiation, and of the worshipping and keeping of the holy Romaine hostie, and of the feast and pro∣cession which is dedicated vnto it.

LEt them not then finde it straunge,* 1.126 if we doe not beleeue thē at all, when they say vnto vs, Lo here is Christ, yea there is Christ: behold, he is in the wildernesse, or in the closets. For Ie∣sus Christ doth not giue vs testimonie of such a

presence of him in his Churche, neither of any such comming of his from heauen but in deede giueth vnto vs one cleane contrary. No more may they also alleage vnto vs in this behalf the authoritie of the auncient Church, nor of the an∣cient doctours, nor the auncientie of their reli∣gion, touching such worshipping, reseruation, and keeping of the bread, & of their holy hostie.* 1.127 For the auncient Church hath at the least con∣tinued vpon the point of a thousand and three score yeeres, before that the doctrine of trans∣substantiation was brought into it, receiued and approued by the councel, in such sorte as the Ro∣maine Church hath holdē it euer since, to witte, from the time of the Pope Nicholas the secōd,* 1.128 and afterward of Gregorie the seuenth, about the yeere 1074. But this was not done at all without contradiction of many, which coulde not profit at al, forsomuch as they were oppres∣sed by the authoritie of the Romaine Popes, and of y^e multitude of their adherentes. The custome for all that, was not in the same church, to keepe the bread in cupbordes, boxes, and pixtes, before the time of Honorius the third,* 1.129 who ordeined it about the yeere 1226. that hee was in the Ro∣maine Chaire, nor also to beare it in solemne procession, and to dedicate a speciall feast to it, vnto the time of Pope Vrbane the fourth,* 1.130 who ordained that feast, which commonly is called

the feast of God, or of the holy body of God. Be∣holde then the antiquitie of the religion which followeth such doctrine and such maner of do∣ings, and as touching the principall authours, vnto the which it may be ascribed.* 1.131 And thereby euery man may knowe, what faith they ought to giue to the trāssubstantiatours and Romaine doctours, which affirme that the Romaine reli∣gion which they at this daye doe followe, is the religion of the true auncient Churche, and that they haue receiued it of Iesus Christ, and of his Apostles, and is come euen to them, from hande to hand by a continuall succession.* 1.132 Men may al∣so iudge by the very same, which were the Apo∣stles, from whom they receiued such doctrine, & such ceremonies, superstitions, and idolatries, and what iniurie they do to Iesus Christ and to his Apostles, and to all the auncient Church, in abusing, as they doe, the name and authoritie of them, to giue a more faire shewe to the inuen∣tions of men, and the more to cōfirme the poore ignorant in their errours and abuses. For as I haue already declared, the whole ancient church and the true doctors of the same did not knowe any such transsubstantiation, as that of the Ro∣maine Church, which is at this daye, nor any o∣ther conuersion of the signes of the sacramēts into the thing which they signified, but onely in respect of the vse of them, as I haue already de∣clared.

And therefore it had also no such wor∣shipping and keeping of the bread and of their hostie, as is that whereof I haue now spoken.

Chapter. x.

Of the sacrifice of the Romaine Masse, and of the building of the same vpon the transsubstantiation, and of the onely sacri∣fice of Iesus Christ, and of the contrarietie that is betweene the same and that of the Masse.

I Will not nowe bryng foorth anye more proofes, wherewith the better to cōfirme that which I haue already sayde of all these things, because that I haue sufficiently written of it in diuerse other bookes, and that I did not deter∣mine for this present, but onely to touche and handle them briefly and summarily. And there∣fore I will now come to the eight point,* 1.133 which is concerning the sacrifice of y^e Romane priests in their masse: the which dependeth also of the transsubstantiatiō, and hath his foundation vpō the same. For if they did confesse that the bread and the wine did remaine alway bread and wine in the same,* 1.134 they durst not affirme nor saye, that they do offer vnto God bread and wine in sacri∣fice for the remission of sinnes, & the redemptiō

of soules, as well the liuing as the dead, as they boaste them selues to doe daily in their masses. For, for the first, seeing that according to the te∣stimonie of the Epistle to the Hebrewes,* 1.135 there is no sacrifice offered for the remission of sinnes, without shedding of blood, they can in no waies make sacrifice of bread and of wine, for so much as it shoulde bee without sheading of bloud. And then what reason should they haue to offer to God bread & wine for y^e redēption of soules,* 1.136 and for the saluation of man? and of what ver∣tue and efficacie might such a sacrifice be? And therefore, seeing that they woulde conuert the Sacrament of the Supper into a sacrifice,* 1.137 and transforme it into a Masse, they must in deede foorthwith transsubstantiate the bread and the wyne, into the bodie and into the blood of Iesus Christe, to the ende that by that meane they might afterwarde offer them in sa∣erifice, for the remission of sinnes, and for the redemption of soules, and not onely for the ly∣uing, but also for the dead. Wee may not then greatly marueile if that they doe fight strongly and assuredly to mainteine their transsubstan∣tiation:* 1.138 without the which they are neuer able to mainteine their sacrifice: without the which also their purgatorie would yelde them a very barren reuenue, with all their other inuentions.

But what foundation haue they for this sacri∣fice, I do not say in the institution of the supper of the Lorde onely, but also in all the holy scrip∣tures? For, for the first, we do not reade at all,* 1.139 that when Iesus Christ did institute and admi∣nister the supper, he did in any wise offer in sacrifice, either the bread or the wine, which hee ordeined to be signes of the same, nor in like sort his bodie nor his bloud. For it is not in the sup∣per y^t he did offer thē really in sacrifice to God for man,* 1.140 but vpō the crosse. For the whole scrip∣ture maketh no mention of two sacrifices of Iesus Christ, for the redemption of man, but of one onely, which is so perfect that he needed not to make it but one time onely, and it could not bee offered by any other then by Iesus Christe him selfe, the very sonne of God, which onely is the priest,* 1.141 the sacrificer, the Sacrifice, the Tem∣ple, and the Altar: and the same may in no wise be reiterated by any creature, seeing that it is of vertue eternall and of deserte infinite. For this cause the sacrifice of the masse can not stande with this, but it must necessarily be that y^e one or the other be abholished, to giue place to one one∣ly, seeing that there is but one which is full and perfect, and there may none other be had: seeing then that the same of Iesus is such an one, it abolisheth all the others.

Chapter .xi.

Of the difference that the Romaine doctors do put betwene the bloudy sacrifice & the not bloudy of Iesus Christ, & in what sense the aunciēt doctors of the Church did take both the one and the other, and did cal the supper by the name of sacrifice: And of the things which were obserued in the assem∣blies of the auncient Church.

IT may not be then, that the Romayne sacrifi∣cers doe lay before vs 2. sortes of sacrifices of Iesus Christ, for the remission of sinnes, to wit,* 1.142 the one not blouddy, that is to say, without shed∣ding of bloud, the which he offred in the supper, and the other blouddy, to wit, with shedding of ••loud, the which he offered vpon the crosse. For by what testimonie of the Scripture will they ••oue this first sacrifice which they terme,* 1.143 not blouddy, vpon the which we are in controuersie with them, and of the which they say that they ••e sacrificers, and successors of Iesus Christ in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 behalfe? For we doe not disagree with thē ••t all, as touching the second. And concerning ••••e first, wee will not make any difficultie to ••••aunt them that the auncient doctors of the ••hurch, and the auncient Church which folo∣••ed their doctrine, haue indeede called the sa∣••••••••ēt of the supper, sacrifice, in that sense that

the holy Scripture calleth the same name the woorke of the preaching of the Gospel,* 1.144 by the which the true ministers thereof bring men vn∣to God, as though they did offer men vnto him: and as it doth call also the mortification of the Christians, whereby they offer them selues vnto God for liuing and reasonable sacrifices, and in like sort the praiers,* 1.145 thanks giuing & the almes, because that al these things were done aunciēt∣ly in the supper. For it was not celebrated with∣out the preaching of the word of God,* 1.146 nor with∣out praiers and thankes giuing (from whence it hath had the name of Eucharistie among the Greekes) nor without almes and gathering; and such other like good workes, the which God ac∣cepteth for sacrifices.* 1.147 But these are not at al pro∣piciatory sacrifices for the remission of sinnes, & the redemption of soules, but are sacrifices of praise and thankes giuing. For the Christian Church doth not acknowledge any other sac••••••fice propiciatorie, but onely that which Iesu•• Christ him selfe did offer in his owne person▪ not whē he did iustitute and administer the sup∣per, but whē he suffered for vs, and namely inh•••• he died for our sinnes.* 1.148 For al his life was a pe••••petuall sacrifice, but wee take him chiefly in hi•• death, because that it was therein ended, as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 him selfe did witnesse vpon y^e crosse. Then wh•• the auncients did call the sacrament of the su••∣per,

a sacrifice not bloudy; they toke it in the sēse that I haue already declared, that the Supper was a sacrifice of praise & thankes giuing:* 1.149 they haue also called it so because that they haue oftē times taken the name of sacrifice, for that which we do call diuine seruice & praier, forsomuch as al y^e parts therof, & al y^e things therein required, are comprised in the celebration of the Supper, in that same maner as it was instituted by Iesus Christ, and celebrated by the Apostles, and by y^e true auncient Church.* 1.150 For according to the testimony of Saint Luke, the first Christian Church had foure thinges in singular recōmē∣dation in their assemblies. The first was the praiers, and then the doctrine of the Apostles, and the thied, breaking of bread, and the fourth, the communion by the which two latter wee must vnderstand the administration and distri∣••••tiō of the Supper, and the gatherings for the ••oore, & the distributiōs which were made vnto ••hem. When then the auncients do call the sup∣••er sacrifice, and that they doe make mencion of sacrifice not bloudy, they vse it in that sense y^t haue already declared, as it appeareth plain∣•••• by their owne testimony. Wherefore, we wil ••••t make any great difficulty, to graunt y^t the ••upper was a sacrifice in that sense, to wit, a ••acrifice of praise and thankes giuing, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not a Sacrifice propiciatorie for the

remission of sinnes & the redemption of soules, in such sorte as the Romaine catholiques do af∣firme their masse to be, into the which they haue conuerted the supper of the Lorde.

Chapter xii.

Of the trumperies of the doctors of the Ro∣mayne Church concerning the name of sacrifice and the vse thereof: and chiefly of the confusion which they put betwene the sacrifice propiciatorie, and Eucharistique, and betweene sacrament, and sacrifice, and of the differēce that must be put betwene the one and the other.

WHereupon it is needful that euery man he warned of 2. trumperies, by the which the Romayne doctors do deceyue the ignorant, a••∣using the name of sacrifice and of the authori∣tie and testimonie of the auncient doctors of the Church,* 1.151 in this matter. The first is in the con∣fusion y^t they make betwene the sacrifices: The other, in that they take the name of sacrifice in the writings of the auncient doctors, for y^e masse such as it is in the Romayne Church. For first they do take for sacrifice propitiatorie, that which the auncient Doctors did take for sacrifice 〈◊〉〈◊〉 praise and thanks giuing, and for a commem••••ration of the death of Iesus Christe, the whi••••

for the same cause men may call Eucharistique, euen as some men do call it, to giue men y^e bet∣ter to vnderstand this difference, as men doe cal the Supper Eucharistie, for y^e same cause. For the which cause they haue called the Supper sa∣crifice not blouddy, to giue to vnderstande,* 1.152 that they did not meane to offer Iesus Christ to God in sacrifice in the same for the remission of sinnes and the redemption of soules, for somuch as the same cannot be done but by the very and onely sonne of God Iesus Christe, nor without the shedding of his bloud: but onely for a cōmemo∣ration of the propiciatory sacrifice, y^t which Ie∣sus Christ him selfe did offer of his owne body & bloud, & to yeeld him praise and thankes. For they did knowe very wel, what difference there is betwene sacrament and sacrifice, and that the supper was not instituted by the Lorde for a sa∣crifice, but for a Sacrament.* 1.153 For in a sacrifice which is offered for the remission of sinnes and the redemption of soules, it behoueth that the man offer vnto God the thing which he sacrifi∣ceth vnto him, and that it be sufficient to appease ••is wrath: or otherwise the sacrifice is not per∣••ect, neither may it satisfie God. And there∣fore it was, that al those of y^e Leuits which were ••rdayned in the lawe, to represent that of Iesus Christ, did cease to giue place to him only. But ••e sacraments are ordayned, not at all to offer

any thing to god for the remission of sinnes, but on y^e contrary, to receiue of him the spiritual and heauenly good things which he offreth & com∣municateth vnto vs by the same. And therefore Iesus Christ did not offer vnto God eyther the bread or the wine of the Supper,* 1.154 or yet his body and his bloud in the same, but did offer and com∣municate them both, to wit, the signes and the things signified by them, to his disciples, distri∣buting bodily vnto them that which was body∣ly and earthly, & sptritually that which was spi∣ritual and heauenly.* 1.155 And therefore he said, Take ye, and eate ye, and drinke ye, the which woordes he did not addresse vnto▪ God, nor consequently the bread and the wine which he commanded to eate and to drinke, neither his body nor his bloud signified by the same, but to his disciples, and consequently to al those vnto whom the sup∣per is administred according to his ordinance. And therefore when Iesus Christ sayd,* 1.156 This is my body which is giuen and broken for you, he sayd it not in respect of that which he then did in the supper towardes God his father, but in res∣pect of that which he after did towardes him vp∣on the crosse, very shortly after his supper. For it is there where he was giuen for vs,* 1.157 when he of∣fered him selfe vppon the crosse in sacrifice 〈◊〉〈◊〉 his father, and not at all in the supper. For it 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not there where he gaue him selfe for vs▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉

where he is giuen to vs: for he is there giuen vn∣to vs, in asmuch as he is cōmunicated vnto vs by the meane of this sacrament of the Supper. Whereupon we haue to note that Iesus Christ did vse the present time, for the time to come,* 1.158 ac∣cording to the Ebrue maner of speach, which v∣seth often times indifferently the time passed, y^e time present, and the time to come the one for y^e other, & chiefly when it cōcerneth the promisses of God, forsomuch as that which he promiseth is as certaine, as if it were already present, or as if it were already done. [Note.] The like may we say al∣so of that which is sayd of the wine, This is my bloud of the newe testament, the which is shed for many for the remission of sinnes. For it was not in the supper that the body of Iesus Christ was giuen and broken, and his bloud shed, but vpon the crosse and in his death and passion.* 1.159 For the which canse the translator of the common Latin translatiō, the which y^e priests vse in their masse, and in all their diuine seruice, hath translated these, woordes into the time to come for the time presēt, saying, which shal be giuen, and which shal be broken, and which shal be shed &c. in the stead that there it is, which is giuen, and which is broken, and which is shed, in the woordes of the Euangelistes and of Saint Paul, as they haue set them downe in y^e Greeke.

And al the auncient doctors of the Church haue not taken thē in any other sense.* 1.160 And forsomuch as they did wel vnderstand what differēce there was betwene sacrament and sacrifice, they had not any masse to offer vnto God a sacrifice of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ, as y^e Romaine priests at this day doe boast thē selues to do in theirs: but in the stead of such a masse they had the Supper, the which they did not ce∣lebrate at any time, but that they had presently communion of the faithfull to whom the same was administred, and not only to a priest in par∣ticular, as they do in the masse.

Chapter xiii.

Of the name of sacrifice falsely taken for the Romaine masse, & how the Romaine doc∣tors in stead to proue that Iesus Christ and his Apostles did institute and celebrate the Masse, doe proue that they instituted and celebrated the Supper, & in stead to proue that the auncient doctors did take it for a propiciatory sacrifice, they proue that they vsed the name of sacrifice in an other sēse.

BEholde then here one great trumpery, the which proceedeth either of the ignorance or of the malice of the Romaine doctors & priests, which doe make the ignorant beleeue,* 1.161 that the

auncients did call the Supper sacrifice in the same very sense that they at this day do take it in their masse, wherein they doe them great wrong. For they did neuer so vnderstand or teach. And albeit their should haue so vnderstood & taught, we mought not folowe their doctrine in that behalfe, because that it should be cleane contrary to that of the Apostles, and namely to all the Epistle to the Hebrues. And then folow∣ing that trumpery, they doe yet build an other very great one vpon y^e same, which is y^e second,* 1.162 wherof I am now to speake: which is, that they willing to proue that the auncient doctors haue approued their Masse, and that the same was in the auncient Church, such as it is at this day, they take the passages wherein the auncient fa∣thers doe vse the name of sacrifice, oblation and offering, and such other like, as wel in the latine as in the Greeke, when they speake of the Sup∣per, or of all the diuine seruice, as though they had vsed the name of masse in the same, and that they had vnderstod by the names which they did vse, of such a masse as y^e Romaine masse nowe is. [Questio] For here is no question whether y^e aun∣cients did vse such words or names, but whether they tooke those words in the same sense y^t they are at this day taken in the Romaine Church. And albeit that they should haue vsed the name of masse, in the stead of the name of sacrifice, and

such like, y^t which they vsed, to signifie all the di∣uine seruice of the Christians, yet should they haue nothing gayned at all. For it must yet be, that they doe shew that the masse of y^e aunciētes was such an one as theirs is, and that there was in it like sacrifice. The which they shal neuer do. For albeit that some of the auncients did be∣gin to vse the name of masse for the diuine ser∣uice, after three or foure hundred yeres after the natiuity of our Lorde, that notwithstanding it was but in small vse: yet in two hundred yeres after that, to wit, before the time of Gregory y^e first, no more was it then taken for such a masse as it is at this daye in the Romaine. Church. For there was not yet at that time any such,* 1.163 neyther could there be, for so much as y^e greatest nomber of the workemen, which haue framed y^e same from age to age, & frō yere to yere for a lōg time, were not yet borne at y^e time. Behold then howe the Romayne doctors doe deceiue y^e ignorant, vnder the name of sacrifice, and vnder the authoritie of the auncient doctors, as vn∣der the name and authoritte of Iesus Christ and of the Apostles. For after that they haue greatly bragged that Iesus Christ and the A∣postles did institute and celebrate the masse, they proue, to confirme the same, that they haue instituted and celebrated the Supper, wherein

they proue and confirme that which is not at all in question or in doubt, and not that at all which is in controuersie: but in stead of pro∣uing and confirming that, they proue and con∣firme an other thing which is out of al contro∣uersie. Euen so doe they concerning the aun∣cient fathers. For willing to proue by them the same of the masse and of the sacrifice there∣of, they proue that they haue vsed the name of sacrifice, and other names also as well Greeke as Latines, which signifie as much as diuine seruice, and publike ministerye in our lan∣guage.

Chapter xiiii.

In what sort the sacrifices of the lawe were sa∣craments and sacrifices both together: and that the supper cannot be both, but onely a sacrament: and of the agreement & dif∣ference that is betwene the same, and the sacrament of the Paschal lambe.

BVt they will replie,* 1.164 that Iesus Christ and his Apostles, and the auncient dnctors of the Primitiue Church, haue done both in the Supper, to wit, that they offered vnto God in Sacrifice, the body and the bloud of

Iesus Christ: and thē haue also forthwith com∣municated them to the Christian people, & that in so doing, there is no inconuenience but y^t the supper may be both sacrament and sacrifice to∣gether. I answere,* 1.165 it is not enough that they do affirme, except they doe proue it foorthwith. I wil graunt them that the sacrifices of the lawe were also as a kind of sacramēts, and that there were some, in the which there was oblation to God of one part of the beast which was sacrifi∣ced, and in like sort communion of an other part among the people, and that there was ioyned to the sacrifice a banket, the which sig∣nified the communion of the people in y^e same. But that cannot agree with the supper.* 1.166 For, for the first, as there was dayly newe banket in these sacrifices, so was there newe hostie. For they mought not sacrifice one very thing ofte∣ner then once, nor by consequent communicate the same more often to the people, but they must needes take dayly new. But y^e like is not of the sacrifice of Iesus Christe. For there is but one onely hostie of the same, which is very Iesus Christ,* 1.167 the which is the lambe of God that ta∣keth away the sinnes of the worlde, figured chiefly by the paschall lambe, which among the rest was chiefly sacrifice and sacrament both together, because that the Lord had two re∣gards

in the institution of the same. For first he instituted it to be in the Church of Israel, for a memoriall and remembrance of the passage which the Angell of the Lorde did make in E∣gypt, striking the first borne of the Egyptians,* 1.168 and of the deliuerance of the Israelites from the captiuitie of them, as Moyses doeth plainly witnesse. For the which cause it was called by him, and consequently by the other Hebrues, Pesah, which is to say Passage, by the name of the thing that it did signifie, of the which the Greekes and the Latines haue made their worde Pascha, the which they haue vsed, and which since haue bene cōuerted into our speach, by the name of Easter. Beholde then howe this sacrament had regard vnto that which was al∣ready done, and to that benefit of God y^e which the Israelites had already receyued, touching their deliuerance out of Egypt. And by that meane, it was a memorial and a sacrament cō∣memoratiue, and a sacrifice of praise & of thanks giuing, in respect of the things which were al∣ready passed. But beside that,* 1.169 the Lorde had yet regard to the deliuerāce of mankind the which should be wrought by Iesus Christ, whereof y^t of Egypt was a figure.* 1.170 And forsomuch as he should worke this deliuerance by the passage of his death and by the sacrifice of his body and of his bloud,* 1.171 the sacrifice was ioyned to the sa∣crament

in the Paschal lambe, to the end that i•• should the better represent that which was yet to be done and accomplished. Beholde wherein it was ordeyned for the thinges which were yet to come, and of the which men did yet looke for the accomplishment. For that cause there was there a sacrifice, which did represent that of Ie∣sus Christ to come. And also there was ioyned vnto, a banket, which did signifie the communiō of him, as it ought to be in euery sacramēt. And therefore Saint Paul hath ioyned the one with the other, expounding the veritie of that figure. For after that he hath sayde that Christe our passeouer was sacrificed,* 1.172 he exhorteth the faith∣full to the spiritual banket of this sacrifice, and to the continuall feast which wee should make and celebrate alwaies. Seeing then that the thing to come figured by this sacrifice & sacra∣ment, was accomplished, the one and the other are ceassed. For we haue nowe the Sacrifice of∣fered by Iesus Christ, whereof the other was but a shadowe and figure. Wherfore seing that wee haue the body and the trueth, the shadowe and the figure doth clerely cease. And therefore euen as our Lorde Iesus Christ did chaunge y^e Circumcision of the Church of Israel,* 1.173 into the baptisme of the Christian Church, euen so hath he chaunged the Sacrament of the Paschall lambe, into that of the Supper, the which hath

that in common with the sacrament of the Pas∣chall lambe, that as it had regard to the passage which was made in Egypt, and to the deliue∣raunce of the children of Israel, which were thinges that were alreadie done: in like sorte the Supper hath regarde to the passage which Iesus Christ hath made by his death, and for the deliuerance which he hath brought to mankind by the sacrifice which he hath offred in the same, which are also things that are alreadie done and passed. They haue in like sort both of thē this in common,* 1.174 that euen as the sacrament of y^e Pas∣chall lambe, was ordeined and celebrated accor∣ding to the commandement which the Lord did giue to Moses, in the same very night, & in the same very time that the passage should be made in Egypt, & y^e people deliuered from the same,* 1.175 euen so Iesus Christ did intitute and celebrate his Supper in the very fame night,* 1.176 and euen before the very time, that he was taken to be brought to be sacrificed, and to woorke the deli∣uerance of mankind. For y^t cause he vsed y^e very same maners of speach in the institutiō, & in the administration of this sacrament, as Moyses did in that of the Paschall lambe.* 1.177 For euen as Moyses did fay of the lambe, It is the passeo∣uer of the Lord, which is to say, the passage the which he did represent, giuing to the signe the

name of the thing signified:* 1.178 euē so Iesus Christ did say of the bread of the Supper, This is my body, and of the wine, This is my bloud of the newe testament, or, This cup is the new testa∣ment in my bloud. Wherefore it is not also to be doubted, that euen as he did folowe the ma∣ner of speach of Moyses, which was much fre∣quented in the holy Scriptures in y^e vse of the sacraments: euen so did he also vse them in the like sense and signification, without disguising any thing at al the accustomed language of the holy Ghost, by sense newe and straunge to such maners of speach. Thus much concerning that which the sacraments of the Paschall lambe, & of the supper, may haue common together, tou∣ching these points. But the Supper hath this different from the same,* 1.179 that it was not institu∣ted to be a figure of any sacrifice to come, nor of any other thing which mought be yet to accō∣plish, but only to be a sacrament cōmemoratiue of the sacrifice already offered by Iesus Christ and for the communication of the same. And therefore there is no propiciatorie sacrifice for y^e remission of sinnes, in this sacrament offered to God by the ministers which do administer it, but onely the banket, which witnesseth vnto vs the communication which wee haue in the sa∣crifice which is already offered. For seeing that it endureth for euer because of his eternall and

infinite vertue, it needeth not at all to be offered againe: wherefore there resteth no more to doe in respect of the same, but onely the application and communication which is done ordinarily in the Churche, by the ministerie of the woorde of God and of the sacraments, and chiefly of the supper. And therefore Iesus Christe did com∣mande none other thing to be done in the same, when he cōmanded the distribution of the bread and of the wine, which are the signes, but onely to celebrate the remembrance and commemo∣ration of him, in awayting his comming from heauen, as Saint Paul declareth it vnto vs,* 1.180 say∣ing, As often as ye shall eate this bread & brinke this cup, you shall shewe foorth the death of the Lorde vntill the time that he come. Seing then that Iesus Christ hath ioyned none other pro∣piciatorie sacrifice to his supper, but onely that which he him selfe hath offered vpon the crosse: it followeth then that they which doe ioyne any other vnto it,* 1.181 are very falsaries and counterfai∣tors of his testament, for so much as the supper is as his testament, and the sacrament and wit∣nesse of the benefit which hee offereth and com∣municateth vnto vs by the same. Wherefore if men accounte them falsaries, [Note.] which do falsifie the testament of a mortall man, howe great a fault is this, to falsifie the testament of the eter∣nall sonne of God, adding an other sacrifice to

his for the remission of sinnes, seeing that it may not in any wyse bee reiterated? For see∣ing that there is but this onely hostie, euen so may the same dye but only one, and his blood may bee shead but onely once. From whence it followeth also,* 1.182 that it can not bee offered nor sacrificed to God, but onely one tyme for the remission of sinnes.* 1.183 Wherefore, seeing that Iesus Christe hath already offered the sa∣crifice which is of eternall and infinite vertue, there resteth no more but the partaking and the communication of the same, which is repre∣sented vnto vs by the table of the Lorde in the Supper, and in the visible banquet of the same, as it is done in very deede inuisibly, and spiri∣tually towardes the faythfull, by the vertue of the holy Ghost and of faith. And by that meane the Supper is not ordeined therein to offer a newe sacrifice of the body and of the blood of Iesus Christe, nor to reiterate that which hee him selfe hath already offered, but onely to be a Sacrament, testimonie and commemoration of the sacrifice once offered, and to communi∣cate in the same by the meane of this Sacra∣ment: for so much as the sacrifice can not at all profite vs to saluation, but so farre forth as we are made partakers thereof, as it is needefull for vs to be continually.

Chapter .xv.

That the Masse may be neither sacrifice nor Supper of Iesus Christe, if in deede there were there no other addicion then that of the sacrifice: and that Iesus Christe may not be offered in sacrifice, but once, nor by any other then by him selfe.

* 1.184ANd therefore when the Romaine priests do make of the sacrament of the supper, a pro∣piciatorie sacrifice of Iesus Christe to God the Father, in steade of administring this Sacra∣ment to the faithfull, as Iesus Christe him selfe did and commaunded, and as the Apostles and their true successours, and all the true aun∣cient Churche did obserue and practise, it ap∣peareth euidently that they doe wholy ouer∣throwe the ordinaunce of the Lorde, in what sorte soeuer they colour their Masse. For, for the first, seeing that there is no true commu∣nion for the whole Churche therein,* 1.185 beholde there alreadie the principall intent of Iesus Christe oue•• ••rowen, in respect of the institu∣tion of the Supper, and of the chiefe point of the same. But there is yet more: For albeit that they did indeede administer the Supper to the whole Churche, as often as they shoulde saye and sing their Masse, yet shoulde they for

all that ouerthrowe the ordinance of the Lorde,* 1.186 in adding a sacrifice the which hee hath not or∣dained, to the sacrament by him ordained. For first he hath not commanded to offer and to sa∣crifice to God his father,* 1.187 either the bread or the wine in the supper, neither yet his body and his blood signified by the same, and thē to offer, pre∣sent and communicate the same to his Church, but did cōmaunde to do that only which he hath done in the supper,* 1.188 to witte, to distribute and ad∣minister the things which hee did administer in the same. But in steade of doing that, the Ro∣maine priestes doe nothing in their masse of all that which Iesus Christ hath done and commā∣ded in the supper,* 1.189 but on the contrary, they wil do that which he hath not done & cōmaunded, neither may they in any wise doe, nor yet any o∣ther creature whatsoeuer, no not y^e very Angels them selues.* 1.190 For euen as there is no other hostie which may be sacrificed to God for the remissiō of sinnes, sufficient to satisfie his iudgement, but very Iesus Christ: euen so the same can not be offered any oftener then onely once, the which endureth alway, for so much as it 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••erfect and eternall: nor yet by any other the••••by him selfe onely, for so much as there is no sacrificer meet to offer such a sacrifice, nor that may be allowed of the Father: as is very plainely and euident∣ly set forth in the whole Epistle to the Hebrues.

From whence it followeth that the sacramēt of the supper can not be y^e sacrifice of Iesus Christ for the remission of sinnes,* 1.191 and then much lesse the masse, for so much as it is not the supper of the Lorde, and that in deede it can not be such a sacrifice, albeit it were the very true supper of the Lorde. For being the supper of the Lorde, it could bee no more the same, then that of Iesus Christ and of the Apostles, and of the true aun∣cient Church. For the supper can not be the sa∣crifice which Iesus Christe did offer vpon the crosse, by meane of the reasons which I haue al∣ready yelded. Now there is none other which is propiciatorie for the remission of sinnes, and the redemption of soules, be it bloodie or not bloo∣die, as it shall please them to call it, but euen so as I haue already declared.

Chapter .xvi.

Of the straunge consequence which followe the sacrifice of the Masse, and howe the Masse may not be either sacrifice propicia∣torie, or Eucharistique, and the cause why.

* 1.192FRom whēce I conclude either that the masse may in no wise be a sacrifice, either for the li∣uing or for the dead: or els that Iesus Christ is not the true, perfect, and eternall sacrificer, and the onely sauiour and redeemer, and that his sa∣crifice

is not ful and perfect, and by consequent, that hee is not the true anoynted of the Lorde, and that all that which is wrytten of his of∣fice of Sacrificer, and of his sacrifice, in all the Epistle to the Hebrewes, and in all the rest of the Scriptures, is false. From whence it should also followe, either that the Scriptures which wee doe call holy, should not bee reuealed by the Spirit of God: or els that the Spirite of God should not bee the Spirit of trueth, as it is,* 1.193 but the spirit of errour and of lyes, and by consequent God shoulde not bee God, but shoulde bee in steade of the Deuill, which is a lyer and the father of lyes. Behold the straūge consequēces,* 1.194 on the which men may not thinke without great horrour, which the masse draw∣eth after it: for it can not bee such an one as it is set foorth vnto vs in the Romayne Churche, but that all these consequences must needes followe. Nowe they can bee none other then great blasphemies against Iesus Christe and his sacrifice,* 1.195 and all his benefites: from whence it followeth necessarily, that the masse may no more bee the propiciatorie sacrifice of the body and of the blood of Iesus Christe, then it may be that Iesus Chiste shoulde not bee the true anoynted of the Lorde. [Note.] And if it were so that his sacrifice might bee reiterated, yet

for all that, the same coulde not bee offered by any other then by him selfe onely.* 1.196 But see∣ing that it is eternall, and of vertue infinite, it is no more needefull that it bee reiterated, not onely by any other then by hym,* 1.197 but also by him selfe. Seeing then, that not onely the Masse, but also the very Supper, may not bee the propiciatorie sacrifice of the body and of the blood of Iesus Christe, it fol∣loweth then in deede, that it can not bee the very selfe Sacrifice which was offered by Iesus Christe vpon the crosse. From whence I dos agayne conclude, that if it bee a Sa∣crifice, it can not bee other then a Sacrifice commemoratiue,* 1.198 of the Sacrifice offered by Iesus Christe. And if it be but a Sacrifice commemoratiue of hym, it is not then a Propiciatorie Sacrifice, but Eucharistique, to wytte, of prayse and thankes. [Note.] But yet before that it maye bee such a Sacrifice, it must fyrst bee, that it bee the true Supper of the Lorde, which thing it is not all, neyther maye bee, beeyng such as it is at this present, but is cleane contrary, as men may iudge, as well by that which I haue already heretofore spoken, as by that which I will yet speake hereafter, & by that meane it shal

be no pleasant sacrifice to God, either in one sorte or in an other.

Chapter. xvii.

Of the marchandise of Masses, and of the sa∣crifices of the same, and of the abuses that therein are.

* 1.199ANd by the same men may iudge, what iniu∣rie the Romaine priestes doe to the Catho∣liques of the Romaine Church, in selling to thē their masses for sacrifices, not only commemo∣ratiues and Eucharistiques, but also propiciato∣ries, being notwithstanding either the one or the other. And thereby men may knowe what marchantes they are, & what is their marchan∣dises in that behalfe. And albeit that it were so, that they were sacrifices in both those sortes,* 1.200 yet the markets and faires which they make of thē, should be a very villaine traffique. For do they not sell them for prices agreed vpon, as they do all their other sacramentes and ceremonies, euē against their owne councels and canons, and their owne very decrees:* 1.201 And do they not call the marchandizes of holy things Simonie: O how many priestes haue they, which haue nei∣ther cure nor benefice, nor charge of soule, which were made priestes onely to saye masses, and which doe liue of the marchandizes which

they daily make thereof? And howe many bee there among them which doe liue from the day to his dayes labour, as the prouerbe is, & which haue their teeth very sharpe that day that they finde no marchāts to buye their marchandizes: If I should speake of these marchauntes, that which one of their bookes,* 1.202 called Stella clerico∣rum, doth, they would thinke them selues mar∣ueilously outraged by me. And therefore I will cause it to be spoken vnto them by the doctour which was the authour of that booke. And to the ende that they doe not thinke that I doe al∣leadge him falsely, I will cause him first to speake in his owne proper language, and then I will expounde both the woordes and the sense. Behold now his wordes. The priest which doth celebrate masse for money, seemeth to say with Iudas, What wil you giue me, and I will deli∣uer him vnto you. Therefore it is wrong to sell his Lord. Thinke thou that y^e first seruant which saide, did hang him selfe, Iudas did cast downe the money in the Temple. The priestes which do bestowe the money that they haue of them, for whom they do sing, at the stewes, and vpon their belly, are worse. Iudas solde Christ once, & repented him thereof. And thou perchance hast solde him oftentimes, and doest not repent ther∣of. Take heede lest despairing thou do hang thy selfe. The wordes in Latin are these, Sacerdos

qui pro nummis celebrat, videtur dicere cum Iuda, Quid vultis mihi dare & ego vobis eum tradam? Ergo nefas est vendere. Dominum suum. Cogita quod primus seruus venditor se∣ipsum suspendit, Iudas enim nummos misit in Templum. Peiores sunt sacerdotes, qui dena∣rios pro quibus cantant, mittunt in lupanar & in ventrem suum. Iudas semel Christum vendi∣dit, & de hoc penituit. Et tu forte multoties vē∣didisti, & non penites. Caue ne desperans te ip∣sum suspendas. Behold how this good doctour speaketh. And if the litle marchantes, which are in great trauaile to gaine their poore liuing by these marchandizes, may not be excused in this point, howe much more are the great and fatte marchants, which sell them in grosse, and make greater and more riche traffique of them: See∣ing then that it is so, they may not finde the mat∣ter straunge, if Iesus Christe doe agayne take the whippe in hande to driue such marchauntes out of his Temple,* 1.203 and out of his Churche, and that hee ouerthrowe their seates and their ta∣bles, by the preaching of his Gospell. For if comparison should be made betweene them and those which Iesus Christe did driue out of the Temple of Ierusalem, the difference woulde bee founde so great, that those which Iesus

Christe him selfe in his owne person did driue foorth, shoulde be iustified by those here, as Sa∣maria did iustifie Sodome, and Ierusalem Samaria, according to the testimonie of Eze∣chiel.* 1.204 For the marchauntes which were by Iesus Christe driuen out of the Temple of Ie∣rusalem, had sufficient aucthoritie by the lawe of God, for that which they did. [Note.] For they did not at all sell any false marchaundizes, nor di∣uine and holy things, but onely those things which might bee offered and sacrificed accor∣ding to the Lawe, to the ende that the people which came from farre, should be eased, and that they shoulde not take the payne to leade with them, or to carry so farre, that which they would offer and sacrifice. But for so much as those marchauntes did it not for that cause, nor to the ende that God might be the more honoured, but tooke onely that colour, to make it to serue to their gayne and to couer their auarice there∣with, Iesus Christe did dryue them out as Theeues, Sacrilegious, and Robbers, which did villainously abuse y^e name of God by a false title: home woulde hee then at this day endure the sellers of Sacramentes and of Masses: For if their doctrine of transsubstantiation were true,* 1.205 they coulde not sell any Masse,

without selling foorthwith Iesus Christe i•• flesh & bones, the which they do make of y^e bread and of the wine of the same, according to their owne very doctrine. And if it bee not true, so much the more false and vntrue is the marchan¦dize. This notwithstanding, he that should sup∣presse all the faires, markets, & traffiques, which they do make, should forthwith see very few•• Priests at the Altar. For it is for such stuffe that they doe so fight against the preaching of the Gospell, to mainteine their masse and the sacri∣fice of the same, and consequently their trans∣substantiation, which is the foundation thereof and of all that which it draweth with it. [Note.] And i•• they do confesse that their masse is no propicia∣torie sacrifice, but only Eucharistique and com∣memoratiue of the sacrifice propiciatorie of Ie∣sus Christ, as some of them are constrained to confesse, seing that they may not otherwise saue nor giue colour to their doctrine, they may not yet for all that escape cleare, but are yet y^e more to be cōdemned. For they sell to their marchāts one marchandize for an other, to witte,* 1.206 a sacri∣fice of praise and thankesgiuing, in steade of a sa∣crifice propiciatorie, for the remission of sinnes, and the redemption of soules, as they doe boast that they do in their masse. And if it be neither y^e one nor the other, as I haue already proued, yet are the marchants which do buie such marchan∣dizes

the more deceiued. Wherefore I leaue thē to thinke in what estimation they ought to haue their marchantes. For if they committed none other faulte, this here should be sufficiēt to cause them to leaue & abandon them cleane. For who is so euill a marchant as taketh pleasure to bee deceiued, and to buye euill marchandizes. Thus much concerning the sacrifice of the masse: I will now come to the ninth point, which is yet in controuersie, the which is concerning the cō∣munion as wel of the Supper as of the Masse.

The thirde Booke.

Chapter. 1.

Of the Communiō, which may be in the Ro∣maine Masse and Supper, and how there is not at all any true Communion, and how that it may in no wise be the true Supper of Iesus Christ.

* 1.207I Haue already here before de∣clared, howe that the Supper may not be the Supper with∣out the Communion of the things which do belong there∣unto, and which ought to bee therein cōmunicated, according to the ordināce of Iesus Christ. Now there is no such commu∣nion

in the Romaine Masse. From whence it foloweth that it is not the supper of the Lord, & consequently also that it is not the Sacrament thereof, but is a new sacramēt inuented by mē, and wholy contrary to that of the Lorde, from the which they woulde giue vnto it his foun∣dation and his countenance.* 1.208 For what commu∣nion is there ordinarily, either in priuate or par∣ticular masses, either in those which are publike the which they do cal parochial: for there is both in the one & in the other, but y^e priest only which is at the altar, who doth participate of the bread & of the wine y^t which he doth consecrate in the same. For he eateth and drinketh al alone at his altar, without offering or presenting any thing of that which he eateth and drinketh, not only to the people which doe assist at his masse, but al∣so to his owne fellowes which are of the same occupation that he is of, and which helpe him to saye and doe the same, and are the nerest to his table and altar. This notwithstanding, he cal∣leth this litle banquet which hee maketh in his masse, Communion: and the praier which fol∣loweth it shortly after, Postcommuniō. Cōmu∣nion is taken of common: but what is it that is there common where one taketh all? The only name which they do vse, doth conuince them of their errour, and of the wrong that they do to all Christian people. And if they do replie that they

••o call this litle banquet Communion, [Repl.] not in respect of the distribution which is there made of the bread & of the wine, which is there made to those which doe assist at their masse, for so much as there is there none at all made, according as the Lord hath ordeined in his supper, but in re∣spect of the communication that the priest hath with Iesus Christ: whereunto I answere, [Answere.] that that answere & solution is not sufficiēt enough. For Iesus Christ hath not instituted a Supper wherein one onely minister shoulde communi∣cate, and should distribute the Supper vnto him self alone: but hath ordained it for al those which are capable thereof in his Churche, which is the communiō of Saincts, to the which this sacra∣ment belongeth in generall, and not to certain particulars only.* 1.209 And therfore S. Paul hath writ∣ten, The bread which we breake, is it not y^e com∣muniō of y^e body of Christ, & the cup of blessing, the which we blesse, is it not y^e cōmunion of the blood of Christ? For we which are many are one bread & one body, in asmuch as we are al parta∣kers of one very bread. S. Paul doth here set forth vnto vs 2. things. The first,* 1.210 y^t the supper is not for one alone but for many, & for y^e whol church: & the other, y^t it ought not to be dismēbred, but to be fully administred, aswel to y^e Christiā people as to y^e ministers of y^e same, w^tout cutting frō thē y^t one half, or any thing whatsoeuer, as y^e Romain

priestes doe in their Supper, which they doe ad¦minister to the people, in cutting the cup cleane from them. For it sufficed them not to cut them off from all the Communion of their masses, which they do saye, and doe dayly, and likewise from that of the parrochial masses, which they do say euery sunday: but that they must needes cut from them the full one halfe of that Sup∣per which they do minister vnto thē, once, twise▪ or thrise in the yere, vpon certaine of their most solemne feastes.* 1.211 The which thing is yet an o∣ther newe inuention, cleane contrarie, both to the supper of the Lord, and to all the true anciēt Church.* 1.212 For before the Councel of Constance, holden in the yere, 1415. there was neuer any ordinance made in the Church, whereby it was forbidden to administer the cuppe to al the peo∣ple, as the Romaine doctours them selues are enforced to confesse. This notwithstanding, the corrupted and abastardised Romaine church,* 1.213 which hath made this ordinance, cleane contra∣ry to the expresse cōmandement of Iesus Christ and to the obseruatiō of the true anciēt church, as well the Romaine as of all y^e true vniuersall churche, is that true ancient Romaine Church, and the true catholique Churche, which did im∣mediatly succeede y^e Apostles, if we will beleeue the Romaine doctors, albeit that shee be appa∣rantly cleane contrary to it.

Chapter ii.

Whether the Supper of the Lord may be a true supper, if any of the signes of the same be cut off, and whether Iesus Christ did or∣dayne any thing superfluous in the same, whether he did ordeine one sort of supper for one sort of men, and an other for the others.

BVt they will yet replie,* 1.214 that as the bloud is contayned vnder the body, and that the lay people in receiuing the body, receiue also the bloud, albeit that they doe receiue but the signe of the body and not y^t of the bloud: euen so, when the priest communicateth alone in the masse, he communicateth for al the rest, and all the rest do communicate also in the person of him. Behold a very faire starting hole, and a reason very wel grounded. Whereupon I aske them for y^e first, whether Iesus Christ did ordaine any thing su∣perfluous and in vaine in his holy supper,* 1.215 and that was not very necessary? I do not thinke at all that they dare gainesay this. If there be thē nothing superfluous, neyther that is ordayned in vayne, and without great and necessary cause in this sacramēt and mysteries which it contai∣neth, wherefore is it that they dare to cut off a∣ny thing frō thence: And if there be any thing superfluous and not necessary, [Note.] wherefore doe

they not as wel cut off in their masse, that whi•••• they do cut off in the supper of the people, forse much as it must needes be that there be equal∣tie among al in the supper of the Lorde: For h•• ordained none other for the ministers, then h•• did for the people, nor for the pastours then f•••• the sheepe, nor for the clerkes then for the lay•• And what reason haue they to cut off rather th•• wine, [Demaund.] then the bread: They wil answere that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is because that there is greater daunger in re∣pect of the wine, [Answere.] by meane of the shedding tha•• may happen, and consequently of the bloud int•• y^t which it is conuerted, by meane of their trans∣substanciation. Wherfore is it then, y^t the aunc••∣ent Church did not aswel feare this daunger be∣fore the time of the Councel of Constaunce,* 1.216 a did that Church which hath bin since: There 〈◊〉〈◊〉 no doubt at al, but that the errour of transsubstan∣ciation hath brought foorth this also. For th•• Church which hath counterfaited it, hath ha•• since greater feare to shed the bloud, into th•• which the wine is conuerted according to the•••• doctrine, then the true auncient Church ha•••• which did not know any such transsubstanciat••∣on. Wherefore she did not also feare any su••∣shedding of the bloud of Iesus Christ. [Note.] And f•••• that also that she did not vse to keepe the bre•••• and the wine to make them to be worshippe••

as they do at this day in the Romaine Church: in like sort she did not feare that the body and y^e bloud of the Lord should corrupt in the vessels, wherein they were kept. Beholde then one rea∣son, that the most moderne Romaine Church hath had, more then the true auncient Church, concerning this point. And on the other side, e∣uen as the priestes of the same haue magnified their dignitie, by meane of their transsubstancia∣tion, not onely aboue all other men, but also aboue the virgine Mary and the Angels, euen so haue they done in the communion of their masse and of their Supper. For it is no small dignitie to be able to cause Iesus Christe to come and to be betwene their handes, euery day and when it pleaseth them, & to make gods, and to be the creatours of the creatour, as they haue named them selues heretofore in their owne ve∣ry bookes. Therefore it is very reasonable also, that they haue their communion apart, separa∣ted from others which are not of such dignitie, and that it be different from that which is com∣mon to al persons.

Chapter iii.

Whether the Priestes may receiue the Supper for the people, and what communion and excommunication is.

FUrther I aske them if they would be contē∣ted that an other man should dine for them,* 1.217 or else that he should receyue the reuenewes of their benefices, and that he should keepe y^e same for him selfe, and in the meane time should say that he had receyued it for them: I do beleeue that they would not haue such vicars nor such receiuers for them, neither at the table nor i•• their recepts: but would doe both the one and y^• other in their owne person. This notwithstan∣ding they will needes be vicars of their Paro∣chians in such matters,* 1.218 in receyuing alone for them al, that which belongeth generally to eue∣ry of them. And the Parochians are very we•• contented to haue such vicars and receiuers, which do ordinarily receiue the Supper for thē, because that they knowe not what the Supper of the Lorde is, nor what profit or hurt they ma•• receiué by the administration or priuation of same: wherefore they cannot knowe nor cons••∣der the wrong which they do to them, in so d••¦priuing them, be it in all or in parte. For who 〈◊〉〈◊〉 shal wel consider the communion which is in•• masse, and shall iudge thereof according to th•• truth, may of right call it, no communion at all but excommunication. For as communicati•••• signifieth the partaking of many in one thing which is common to them al:* 1.219 so on the contra•• excommunication signifieth the depriuation 〈◊〉〈◊〉

such a partaking and communication, as also to excommunicate, signifieth asmuch as to be put out of the communion & comminalty. Now it is so that the Church, as I haue already decla∣red, is the communion of Saints & the commi∣nalty of the faithfull. And forsomuch as the sa∣craments, being administred according to the pure ordinance of the Lorde, are of the principal outward markes of the true Church, and of y^e communion, & comminaltie, she is also signified and represented by them.* 1.220 For that cause they do receiue those the which they do esteeme for true members of that whole body, and of all that cō∣minaltie which we doe call the Church, and the communion of Saints, acknowledging thē as true Burgesses and Citizens of the kingdome of heauen, and of the holy Citie of God. And by that meane they do communicate vnto them y^e Sacraments, which are vnto them as markes and tokens, which Princes, Lordes, and Cap∣tames doe giue to their seruants and souldiours the which they doe aduow & esteme thē worthy, because of their faithfulnes.* 1.221 On the contrary they doe reiect from the communion of the sa∣cramēts, those whom they cannot acknowledge for true members of the Church, but onely for notten members, or such as are cut off from the same. The which thing they do declare vnto them when they doe shut them from the admi∣nistration [Note.]

of them, to signifie vnto them that they are cut off and shut out, not onely from the company of y^e faithfull, but also of Iesus Christ which is the head, and of al his heauenly court. And by that meane, [Note.] when they do deny them the markes of the true faithful, and do depriue them thereof, the same is as a maner of degradation, as if a man should take from them the tokens which do belong but only to true Christians, & as a man should take from souldiours, the liue∣ry of their Prince and Captaine, as from Trai∣tors, or from cowardly and vntrue seruants, & such as are vnworthy to be any more receyued into the company of others, which are faithfull and true. For that cause we doe call such perso∣nages, excommunicated.

Chapter iiii.

Of the difference which is betwenc the assi∣stants at the masse, be thei priests or no, & the penitents, and excommunicated of the auncient Church, & of the faults which are to be blamed in particular excommunica∣tions.

THen when the priest,* 1.222 which is at the altar, receiueth his sacrament alone, and commu∣nicateth nothing to any one of all those which doe assiste at his masse, is not this as a kinde of excommunication, whereby he shuteth them all

out from the Supper which he receiueth all alone? for doth he not as though there were none but he alone which were worthy & capable ther∣of, &. that all the rest were vnworthy & mought be reiected as persons excommunicated?* 1.223 For there is no great difference betwene that which they do at this day in y^e masse, in respect of those which do assiste at the same, and that which they did in time passed in the auncient Church in y^e administration of the Supper, towarde excom∣municated persons which were in the place of the penitents. For albeit that they did assiste in the Temple, yet for al that they were separated from those which did communicate at the sup∣per, and were shut forth from the communicati∣on of the same, vntil such time as they were re∣conciled to the Church. But yet they had that more then those haue which do assiste at y^e masse, that they did vnderstand both the praiers and the doctrine, which were set forth in the assemblie, & mought make their profit thereof. But y^e grea∣test part of those which doe assiste at the masse, may carry away with them no such profit, forso∣much as they vnderstād there nothing at al. And then when the excommunicated were reconci∣led to the Church, they mought goe to the sup∣per as often as the same should be administred. For they then made no particular. Supper for any, but made it onely generall for all:

wheras euery priest maketh his particular for him selfe, and shutteth out all the rest. Wherein they do commit three notable faults.* 1.224 The first is in y^t as I haue already touched, y^t the cōmon people & those whō they call lay, are depriued of y^e Supper in maner al y^e whole yere: albeit that the priestes doe euery day make theirs, euery of them in particular. The second is, that in the same very time that they do administer the sup∣per generally to al, yet doe not the priestes ad∣minister theirs with the rest of the body of the Church, but doe it all aparte, as though they were of an other Church, and members of an other body. The third is, that being already so separated from the rest, yet doe they separate them selues among them selues the one from the other. For euery of them maketh his Sup∣per aparte, vpon his altar, without communi∣cating any thing to any of his felowes.

Chapter v.

Of the particular masses, and Suppers of the Romaine Church: and howe much they are repugnant to the institution & nature of the Supper of the Lord.

THey do very il agree in euery respect in this w^t the ordinance of y^e Lord. For men may not

say at al of any of their Suppers made in this maner, that which Saint Paul hath written of the communion of the true Supper, saying,* 1.225 Wee which are many, are one bread and one bo∣dy, forsomuch as we are all partakers of one ve∣ry bread: For euery one doth not partake here of one very bread nor at one very table,* 1.226 for eue∣ry one hath his bread and his table apart. Saint Paul in his time did rebuke the Corinthians, for that they did not tary the one for the others, when they did celebrate the Supper, but did separate the one from the others, and chief∣ly the rich from the poore, as well for the con∣tempt of them, as for the bankets which yet at that time they did adde to the Supper. And for that cause he wrote vnto them, When then ye doe assemble your selues together, it is not to eate the Supper of the Lorde: for euery man taketh his owne particular supper &c. Men mought by greater reason say the like of this particularitie of masses and of Suppers, which are made in the Romaine Church. It is true, that the table of the people is more com∣mon. So is it notwithstanding, that the same is yet greatly deuided, and separated without any necessity.* 1.227 For as euery priest hath his a∣part vpon his altar, & in his Chapell, euen so do they administer the Supper after their maner,

to those which will haue it apart and in particu∣lar in all their Chappels and altars, the which will separate them selues from the common ta∣ble of others. The which thing doth very euill agree with the nature of this holy Sacrament, which is vnto vs a Sacrament,* 1.228 aswel of y^e vnion that the faithful haue with Iesus Christe their head, as his mēbers, as of that which they haue euery of them with the other among them by his spirite. Wherefore the more that wee may represent this vnion, being all vnited together in the communion of the Supper, so much the better doe wee accomplish that which the same Supper doth represent vnto vs. For that cause doe wee eate all of one very bread, and drinke all of one very wine,* 1.229 the which notwithstanding that they be both made of sundry graines ga∣thered together, yet for all that they make but one very lofe and one very wine. And thereby y^e Lord would giue vs to vnderstand, that wee which were scattered abroad, are brought toge∣ther by his death,* 1.230 as Saint Iohn witnesseth, and are reunited with him, and y^e one with the other. By meane whereof as we eat al of one bread, & drinke al of one wine & at one very table,* 1.231 euen so albeit y^t we be many, yet ought we alwaies to be altogether one, gathered together in one bo∣dy, as many graines in one lofe & in one wine.* 1.232 Wherefore if it mought he, that all y^e members

of the whole vniuersall Church mought cōmu∣nicate together at one very table, and supper, it were to be desired that it mought be done, the better to represent such a blessed vnion. But be∣cause that it cannot be so done, it is requisite y^t al doe celebrate the same in those places where they may assemble commodiously in greatest nombers, for so holy and blessed a woorke.

Chapter vi.

That the particular masses and Suppers of the Romaine catholikes doe rather represent a diuision and scattering abroade in the Church, then an vnion and communion.

ANd therefore the priests and the Romaine catholikes do very euil cōsider these things. For they do cleane contrary, deuiding and se∣parating them selues in sort that they do deuide and separate them selues the one from the o∣thers, both in table, in bread, and in their wine, as though their body of their Church were a body deuided, dismembred, and rent in pieces, and that there were at all neither v∣nion nor coniunction among them. For, for the first,* 1.233 beholde there are the tables of the priestes separated from that of other men, the

which they do not prepare very often: and albeit that they did often prepare them, they do allowe as many particulars as men would haue in di∣uers places, and at sundry times, without kee∣ping any certaine order. And howe often is it that they doe prepare them for themselues, whē they do not prepare thē for any other at all? For in al their masses, wherein none of the assistants doe communicate with them, they doe pre∣pare them only for them selues. And when they doe prepare them for them selues, they should very well content them selues to prepare one for al, and to communicate the one with the others, and to receiue the Supper the one at y^e hand of the other, without preparing so many tables apart, & so many bankets in a morning, al separate the one from the other, as though euery of them did excommunicate his fellowe, being at his seueral table and communion, who hath nothing common with any man. Wherin euery of them plaieth two parts: For they play the part of the minister which doeth administer the Supper, and of him vnto whom it is admi∣nistred. For euery of them is minister to him selfe,* 1.234 and doth receiue of him selfe. If they doe vnderstand that their masse is a Sacrifice and sacrament of the supper both together, as they doe affirme it, they should yet at the least when

they haue offered their sacrifice, make their communion more generall then they doe, and to call the people with them thereunto, or at the least their felowes, which are of the same very occupation that they are. And in so dooyng, it should not be nedefull to haue so many tables, nor so many altars, nor so many Chappels. And the fewer y^t they were, so much the better should they represent the vnion, whereof the supper is vnto vs a sacrament, in stead of the diuision and dissipation which is in so many their Suppers which they make apart, which are no Suppers at all.

Chapter vii.

Of the inequality which is betweene the sup∣per of the priestes, and that of the people, in the Romaine Church in respect of the breads, and of the gods of the same, & of their adoration and of their sacrifice.

ANd then whereas the nature of the Supper requireth an equality in all men, they on y^e contrary doe put there great inequalities.* 1.235 For as they do separate the table of the people from theirs, euen so do they make it farre vnequal to theirs: chiefly in two points. The first, in that that they doe not giue vnto them of the same wine that they do drinke, the which they cut frō

them in the banket. The other is, that also they put a difference in y^e bread. For those which are for the priestes, are greater and larger thē those which are for other men, the which are much lesse in quantity. And by that meane they haue great and litle Gods, as they haue great and litle hosties, the great ones are for the priests, & the litle ones for the people.* 1.236 And as the dig∣nitie of the priests is great aboue al other men, euen so is there great difference betwene their Gods, and those of the common people, not on∣ly touching their greatnes and forme, but also touching their dignities and honours. For euen as theirs are more great and larger, and of fai∣rer shewe, euen so are they lifted vp on high and shewed to al men, and worshipped solemnely of al men. But the other litle gods which are pre∣pared for the common people, are not lifted vp at all in such honour and dignitie, but doe re∣maine there quietly vpon the table, vntill the time that they be distributed to be eaten, with∣out any other shewe or so great handling, or so much turning and returning by the hands of the priestes, as those, which are made for them,* 1.237 haue. And then there is yet this point more, that there are none but the Gods of the priestes, which are offered in Sacrifice, and

not the others the which are not made but to be eaten incontinently after, or else to be kept in boxes, and cupbordes, for a kinde of prouisi∣on to the end that there be no want of Gods ready made, but that there may bee good store at what time soeuer neede shall require, either to cary to the sicke, or to coniure y^e time, the tempestes, and the deuils, and to make them to serue to other such like occupations. Beholde many inequalities which doe very euill agree with the nature of the Supper, [Note.] and with the vnion which should be represen∣ted by the same. Wherefore, rather then so to disguise it, it should be much more agree∣able, not onely that all should haue one table, but also one very bread and one very wine, and to haue the bread made of such a fashion that it may be broken and distributed to euery one,* 1.238 as Iesus Christ and his Apostles haue v∣sed it, and as it was vsed and practised in the auncient Church. For this maner of distribu∣tion doth much better represent the commu∣nion and the vnion of the Church in the sup∣per, and the charity y^t the faithful ought to haue the one with the other, then when they do giue to euery one a little cake apart. For y^e breaking of y^e bread carieth al this w^t it in the Scripture.

But this importeth not much. Therfore it may 〈◊〉〈◊〉 among iudifferent things, prouided that al 〈…〉〈…〉 ••hich is of the proper substance of the supper, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 wel obserued, according to y^e Lords ordinance.

Chapter viii.

Whether the Romaine priests may iustly ex∣cuse them selues by the people, in that that they are depriued of the communion of their masses.

BUt let vs come now to that which they may replie against that which I haue euen nowe spoken.* 1.239 The Romaine doctors and catholikes do answere vs when we do blame their, for that there is no generall communion in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 masses, that there is no fault at al in the prieste•• which say it. For they doe excuse them selues y^t they are not the cause that there is no commu∣nion of the assistants, for they denie it to no mā: wherefore the fault procedeth from the assistāts which doe not demaund it at all, and which are not at al disposed to receiue it, as they ought to doe, & not from the priestes. By meane whereof they shut thē selues from it. But who is y^e cause thereof, but onely the priestes them selues? For what admonition doe they giue to the people,

either in their masse or before the same, to cause them to prepare and dispose them selues to the communion which they will administer in the same? And when they come to the Altar, do not they know wel enough what supper they ought to administer, and which be those that are dispo∣sed to communicate at the same? doe they not know very well that there are none which are prepared thereunto? for they do not accustome at all to communicate the same, but to such as are first cōfessed to them, and by whom they are aduertised, whether they haue will to communi∣cate or no. And on the other side,* 1.240 what is the chief cause, y^t the people hath so smal care to cō∣municate there? is it not because that they haue giuen them to vnderstand, that they do commu∣nicate for all in the communion of their masse? Wherefore the people beeing so instructed and falsely perswaded, do thinke that they may very well rest vpon their consciences. But if they doe excuse them selues vpon that, that the people is not at all disposed as they ought to bee, they may not say the like of them selues, at the least of those which are disposed to say masse, and are accustomed daily to say it. For they come not at all to the altar without preparing thē selues first, according to their maner. Wherefore is it then at the least that they do not communicate altogether, and that they administer not a sup∣per

in commō among them, and such as shoul•• be disposed to communicate with them, and no•• to separate them selues euery one the one from the other?

Chapter .ix.

That there was not at al any particular or pri∣uate Masse of Supper in the anciēt church, and of the declaratiōs and decrees against such as did not communicate at al, nor did tary the ende of the diuine seruice: and of the originall spring, and multiplication of particular and priuate Masses.

WE doe reade well in the bookes of the an∣cient doctors,* 1.241 and in the Ecclesiasticall histories, that it is come often to passe, that be∣cause the deuotion of the people was already be∣come colde, and that they did very often cele∣brate the Supper, there were but the ministers and the Deacons and the Auncientes of the Churche, and those of the Clergie, and certaine others which did communicate at the Supper. But yet for all that, such as would cōmunicate, did cōmunicate alway together, were they mi∣nisters, byshops, priestes, deacons, or others: and there was no one at all which made his Sup∣per aparte. And in the meane whyle that true Bishops and true priestes, beeing the true mini∣sters of the Churches, did neuer giue the people

to vnderstande that it was sufficient that they alone did administer the Supper for them, and for all the rest of the Churche, neither did they make marchādizes of it, as the Romaine priests do of their masses: but on the contrary, they did greatly blame and rebuke,* 1.242 such as willingly did abstaine from the communiō, and they declared vnto thē y^t they were rebels to God in so doing, and how ingrate & vnworthy they were of such a grace. And amōg the rest S. Iohn Chrysostom did oftentimes cōplaine thereof. There are also sūdrie decrees & canons to y^e same effect, against those which did not cōmunicate at all, & did not tarry to the end of the whole diuine seruice, & of the last benedictiō, whereby the minister did cō∣clude & end the same, as we doe yet at this day, following the maner of the ancient church.* 1.243 But for so much as the seruice & the diuine office is called in these canons, either by the name of sa∣crifice or of oblation, or of masse, the Romaine doctors & catholikes do take it for their priuate & particular masses, to the which they are cleane contrary. For they speake fully of all the diuine seruice, and do make expresse mētion of the sup∣per and of the communion of the people and of all the whole church. But they which applie it in this sort, are so ignorāt, or els so caried away by their owne opinions and affections, that they do take for them selues those testimonies which

are manifestly against them, and do put into our handes a swoorde, wherewith to beate them, and to cut their throtes: but it is sufficiēt for them to dazle the eyes of the ignorant, which do delight to be deceiued with them by such fogges and smokes.* 1.244 When then there is any question of the supper, there must be there certaine order, & the minister must know at what time, and in what place, and to what persons, & in what sorte they ought to administer it. And if there be not such number of persons disposed and prepared to re∣ceiue the same, as is requisit, they must then at∣tend a better opportunitie. For they may not re∣ceiue it for y^e rest, nor any one in particular sepa∣rated and deuided from the other. And therfore the very Romaine church hath had neither par∣ticular and priuate masses and suppers without communion, but onely from the time that the masse was conuerted in the same into a pro∣piciatorie sacrifice, as well for the dead as for the liuing. For euen from that time, it hath bene the worke and occupation of priests & monkes, and mamely from the time that they haue accu∣stomed to set their masses at sale, and to make common marchandizes of the sacrifices of the same.* 1.245 For that traffike hath also bene the cause of the multiplication of the marchaunts, which hath traded that marchandize. From thence is come chiefly a great multitude of priests and of

monkes, wherewith the Church hath bene loden and filled.* 1.246 And for so much as the masses haue bene multiplied according to the multitude of the Sayers and marchants of the same, it was needefull that the communion which should be in the Supper, should be cut off, & that it should be conuerted into that of the onely priest which saieth the masse, and that for sundrie causes. The first is, [unspec 1] for so much as the doctrine which should be set forth to the people, and by the which they should be exhorted to the cōmunion, and to pre∣pare them selues to the same, hath bene taken a∣way and conuerted into mumbling & singing. The other is, that albeit that this fault were not there at all, [unspec 2] men are alwayes of the deuotion colde enough in matters of true religion, and are not very warme, if it be not in superstion and ido∣latrie. Wherefore if at that very time that they haue good pastors, which doe set foorth purely vnto them the doctrine of the Lorde, and doe so∣licite them thereby to do their dutie, they are yet very colde and slowe: we may not maruell then, if when they want that doctrine, they haue litle care, both for the Supper and Communiō, and for all other diuine seruice. The third is, [unspec 3] that albeit that they were the best affected of the world to the religion, yet for all that they could not furnished and accomplishe so many Sup∣pers, and so often, and in so many diuers times

and places, as the priestes doe ordinarily saye Masses. Wherefore it must needes be, either that they do saye fewer, and to better purpose, or els that they doe administer their supper and communion all alone,* 1.247 as they daily do. Behold then how the true vse of the true supper of the Lorde was lost by the meane of masses, and was conuerted into the particular & priuate cō∣muniō and suppers of the priests, which are nei∣ther suppers nor communions, as I haue alrea∣dy sufficiently proued heretofore.

Chapter .x.

Whether men may cōmunicate spiritually at the Supper, by the meane of those which doe there communicate bodily, without communicating there with thē, and whe∣ther the one may receiue the Sacraments better for the other, then he may heare the preaching and beleeue and be saued, the one for the other.

THere resteth yet to aunswere nowe to that which they saye, that albeit that those which assist at the masse, doe not communicate at all bodily at the communion which the priest recei∣ueth in the same, yet for all that, the same letteth not but that they may cōmunicate spiritually. But I aske them,* 1.248 if the meanes which the Lord hath ordeined for to communicate vnto vs his

giftes and graces, doe serue for nothing to that, for the which he hath ordeined them? and whe∣ther it be all one, either to vse them or not to vse them at all. For if they be there of no value, they are ordeined in vaine, the which thing shoulde very euill agree with the wisdome and proui∣dence of the almighty, which doth make and or∣daine nothing without very good & iust cause. And if it be so, they which doe contemne these meanes, do tempt God, & are rebels vnto him, in as much as they do not obey his ordinance: & in so doing, they make them selues vnworthy,* 1.249 & depriue them selues of the benefites which God would cōmunicate vnto them by those meanes. For albeit that he is able to communicate them without those meanes, [Note.] and tha he is not there∣unto subiect at all, yet for all that, seeing that he will cōmunicate thē in that sort vnto vs, he hath made vs subiect to that order. Wherefore if we do contemn and violate them, we do make our selues vnworthy & incapable of y^e good things which hee would bestow vpon vs by the same: the fruite whereof we can not receiue, if we our our selues do not enioy & possesse y^e same in our own very persons, & not by vicars & lieutenāts. For there is no mā y^t may possesse thē, nor enioy and receiue y^e fruite of thē for others, but euery man for him selfe onely. For the which cause it must also be, y^t whosoeuer wilbe made partaker,

must vse in his own person those meanes by the which the Lord doth communicate them and not an other for him: as wee may well iudge by the preaching of the Gospel, and by the doctrine set forth vnto vs in the same.* 1.250 For seeing that faith is giuen by the hearing of the woorde of God, I must, if I will receiue this gift of faith, heare the worde, by hearing whereof the holy Ghost will worke in me, and make me partaker: for seeing that the Lorde hath so ordeined it,* 1.251 if I reiect the preaching of the woorde, I depriue my selfe of the faith which I shoulde receiue by the same. And therefore Saint Paul saith,* 1.252 How shall they belleeue in him whom they haue not heard? and how shall they heare without a preacher? euen then as an other may not beleeue for me, and as I can not be saued by y^e faith of an other, what∣soeuer he be, if I my self doe not beleeue in pro∣per person, euē so none other may heare the Go∣spell for me in such sorte that it may profite me, if I my selfe doe not heare it in mine own per∣son. For faith is,* 1.253 in respect of the soule and of the spirituall life, as the soule is in respect of the body and of the corporall life: wherefore euen as no man may liue a corporall life by meane of the soule of an other man,* 1.254 but onely by his own: euen so no man may liue a spirituall life, by the faith of an other, but by his owne faith, accor∣ding to that which is written,* 1.255 The iust man shal

liue by faith. And euen as no man may entertain and conserue the life which hee receiued by meane of his soule, by the nouriture which an o∣ther doth take, nor by that which he eateth and drinketh, but onely by that which he him selfe doth take, and by the meates and drinkes which he receiueth by his owne preson, euen so is it of the nouriture of y^e faith of euery man by the word of God, for the entertainement and conseruatiō of the spirituall life.

Chapter .xi.

Of the agreemēt which is between the signes of the Sacraments and the woorde of the same, concerning the instruction of man: and of the spirituall communion of them without the bodily in case of necessitie.

* 1.256ANd that which I say of preaching and of the worde, must be also vnderstoode of the Sa∣cramentes and of the administration of them, for so much as they do depend of the same, and that they are, as Saint Augustine hath very wel said,* 1.257 as it were a kinde of worde which is visible and to be felt, and is sensible, the which teacheth men by their eyes, by the meane of the sight, and by the other senses, by the meane of their fee∣lings, as doth the woorde and the voice by the eares, by the meane of y^e hearing. From whēce

it commeth to passe, that by the meane of the sa∣cramentes,* 1.258 man is instructed by all his senses, as well exteriour as interiour, and as well bodi∣ly as spirituall, because that they haue such as a∣greement together, that the exteriour and bo∣dily senses, are as the messengers and the aduer∣tisers of the inward and spiritual senses. Wher∣fore, seeing that God would that by the meane of his sacraments, y^t one should helpe to instruct the others euery one in their order and degree, none may then contemne and ouerthrowe that order. Whereupon I do conclude, that the Ro∣maine priests may as wel receiue the supper for others as for them selues, as they may heare the word of God, & beleeue & be saued for others, for so much as it must needes be, y^t euery man haue all this in his owne person.* 1.259 Wherefore it is as possible that the Christiā people should be fedde spiritually with y^e body & blood of Iesus Christ, by the communion, which the priest alone ma∣keth in his masse, as it is possible that he may be fed bodily, with that which y^e priest dineth with, and eateth & drinketh all alone.* 1.260 Wherefore if y^e people wilbe partakers of y^e things signified by the signes of the supper, they must also be par∣takers of the worde & of the signes of the same: which are the meanes whereby God will cōmu∣nicate those things which they doe signifie. For as he hath ordeined the meane whereby he will

giue, entertaine & conserue the bodily life, euē so hath he done for the conseruation of the spiritual life. And therefore seeing y^t he hath ordeined the ministerie of the word & of the sacramēts in re∣spect of the spirituall life: he that would haue & conserue it w^tout this meane, should do as much as if he would liue a bodily life, without eating or drinking, & vsing y^e meane ordeined of God, for the nouriture & entertainemēt of the same, if there be no such necessitie and let, that they both cannot be had. For God hath not so tied his gra∣ces to external things,* 1.261 that he cannot distribute the same without them, by his diuine vertue, and without externall meanes, if it please him, pro∣uided that there bee no contempt or rebellion of our part: for albeit that he hath made vs subiect thereunto, so farre foorth as hee giueth vs the meanes, yet for all that he is not subiect as wee are, but so farre foorth as it pleaseth him to vse them of his owne free will.* 1.262 And therefore euen as he did nourish extraordinarily & supernatu∣rally by his diuine vertue Moyses, Elie, and Ie∣sus Christ, the space of fortie dayes, they not re∣ceiuing in that time any bodily meate or drinke, according to the order of nature: euen so may hee nourishe spiritually, and communicate his gifts and graces, without the ministerie of man ordeined in his Churche, if it please him, to those which by necessitie are depriued of them,

notwithstanding that they haue great desire to vse the meanes which he hath ordeined, and that they do all their indeuour that they may, to haue the true and right vse thereof,* 1.263 as if a faithfull man were so holden by necessitie of sicknesse, or by captiuitie and prison of tyrantes, or by some other like necessitie which hindreth him, that he may not participate outwardly. For if there were there of his fault,* 1.264 and that hee would for∣beare for his pleasure, and that he would not do his duetie in that behalfe, the reason shoulde bee otherwise.

Chapter .xii.

How greatly and how much the more inexcu∣sable the Romaine priestes should be for depriuing the Christian people from the communion of the body and of the blood of the Lorde in their Masses, and of his blood in their common Suppers, if the do∣ctrine of their transsubstātiation were true.

ANd if the doctrine of transsubstantiation were true, that which I say, would fight yet more sharpely against the Romaine priests. For seeing that they doe affirme that the bread and the wine which are the signes of the supper, are conuerted into the very body and blood of Ie∣sus Christ, the which they signifie, they must al∣so confesse, will they or will they not, that in de∣priuing

priuing the people of these two signes in their masse, they doe also depriue them of the bodie & of the blood of Iesus Christe, and that in their commō supper they depriue them of the blood, deliuering to them but they body, according to their doctrine:* 1.265 for seeing that we must be made flesh, of the flesh, & bones, of the bones of Iesus Christ, by the communiō which we should haue with him, and which is represented vnto vs,* 1.266 as well by baptisme as by the supper, an other can not be that for vs. And by that meane the priests may no more receiue the supper for vs, & in our name, then they may be baptized in our name & for vs. And therefore Iesus Christ said not,* 1.267 y^t he which should eate his flesh and drinke his blood by vicar & lieutenant, should haue life in him, & should be in Iesus Christ, and Iesus Christ in him, but said openly,* 1.268 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud, dwelleth in me & I in him, & hath eternall life, and I will rayse him vp at the latter day. Let the Romaine Catholiques then consider, whether their priestes may eate this meate and drinke this drinke, & rise for all their parochians, and for all those which heare and see their masses: and whether they will be conten∣ted to be so nourished with the flesh and with the blood of Iesus Christe, and so to rise at the lat∣ter daye in the person of their priestes.

Chapter .xiii.

Of the Sacrifice and of the Communion that the priestes doe administer in their masses as well for the dead as for the liuing.

THus much concerning the cōmunion which is in the masse, and concerning the ninth errour which wee doe blame in the same. I will now come to the tenth, which is cōcerning that that the priests doe not doaste y^t they do sacrifice and cōmunicate in their masse only for y^e liuing, but also for the dead,* 1.269 affirming that by that meane they doe applie the sacrifice of Iesus Christe, and the vertue and the merite of the same, as well to the one as to the others. For the which cause they saye, that they doe deuide their hosties into three partes, in their commu∣nion, of the which they dippe the one into the wine in their challice, against the expresse ordi∣naunce of the Lorde, yea, and against the very auncient canons.* 1.270 For the Lorde did not tem∣per the bread with y^e wine, neither did hee make a soppe in the wine in the institution of the sup∣per, neither did he also commaunde to do it. And therefore, it is written in the auncient canons which forbidde the same,* 1.271 that Iesus Christe did distribute the bread apart, and the wine apart, and that he gaue not the bread, nor the morcell tempered to any other then to Iudas, which be∣trayed

him:* 1.272 and he gaue it not vnto him yet in the Supper, but out of the Supper. Nowe of these three partes, that the priestes make of their hostie in their masse, they assigne the one to the liuing, and the two others to the dead, because that they doe make two sortes, to witte, the one which are already happy, and doe raigne in Pa∣radise, and the other which are yet holden in the paines of purgatorie, and haue not yet fulfilled their penance, nor haue fully satisfied vnto God, and by that meane they doe sacrifice and com∣municate, both for the liuing and for the dead, all at one tyme, as though Iesus Christe had not fully satisfied for all by his sacrifice, and as though the ministerie of the woorde and of the Sacramentes, were not limitted within the course of this life, and as though there were such communication betweene the liuing and the dead, as there is betweene those which liue in this world together.

Chapter .xiiii.

That these sacrifices and communions cannot be made in faith, nor cōsequently be plea∣sant to God.

WHerein they do againe greatly faile, & in sondrie sortes. For, for the first,* 1.273 seeing that the doe all that which they doe, in all these

points without any woord of God, they can not doe them in faith.* 1.274 And if they can not doe them in faith, they may then in no wise please God in so doing. But they do greatly displease him. By meane whereof, so farre off is the worke which they do, from being good, that it is in deed but sinne.* 1.275 And that the same is true, I proue it vnto them by that which is written, that what∣soeuer is done without faith is sinne,* 1.276 and that without faith it is impossible to please God. And then I proue that all that which is done without the word of God, is done without faith, because that it is also written,* 1.277 that faith cōmeth by the hearing of the same. Wherefore there where this worde is not, and there where faith hath not the same for his foundation, there is al∣so no faith.* 1.278 Nowe I haue already sufficiently shewed, that they haue no worde of God, where∣upon they may builde any propiciatorie sacrifice for the remission of sinnes, either for the liuing or for the dead, except it bee that which Iesus Christ him selfe hath offered, the which may not be offered againe, neither yet by any other then by him selfe onely.* 1.279 They haue no more woorde of God for that communion which they say also is administred in their masse, as well for the one as for the other, but they haue the worde of God directly contrary to all these points, and chiefly the institution of the holy Supper of the Lord.

It foloweth then, y^t their faith & religion in this matter is not founded otherwise, but only vpon the doctrines & the commandements & tradici∣ons of men, wherby God witnesseth not only by Esay, but also by his own sonne Iesus Christ,* 1.280 y^t he is serued in vaine. And by what testimonies of the Scripture wil they also proue either the praiers, or the suffrages for the dead, and the in∣uocatiō of Saints? Now if there were no other reason but this,* 1.281 Now if there were no other reason but this, it is sufficient to ouerthrowe all these points. For I wil say alwaies, and it shalbe true, y^t al that is done without faith: from whēce it foloweth y^t it is sinne, vntil such time as they be able to shewe by certaine testimonies of the word of God, that he hath commanded & alowed such workes, & y^t he hath giuen commandement & promise therunto: which thing they shal neuer do, but by corrupting and peruerting the true sense of the Scriptures.

Chapter xv.

Whether the ministery aswel of the word as of the sacraments be aswel ordained for the dead as for the liuing, & whether the worke of the same may stretch out so farre as to the dead, & whether the priestes may better re∣ceiue the supper for them then the Baptisme, & better then the other liuing Christians.

ANd further I aske them whether the Lord did ordaine the sacraments either for the li∣uing,* 1.282

or for the dead,* 1.283 or for both together? It is certain y^t it is not for the dead, but for the liuing only. For seeing that the sacraments cannot be administred without the word, vpon the which they are grounded, it is very certaine, that none may be capable of them, but onely those vnto whom the word may be administred with their signes.* 1.284 Now so it is, y^t the one neither the other may be administred to the dead. From whēce it also foloweth, that the sacraments doe no more belong vnto thē, then the preaching of y^e Gospel which is ordinarily vsed in the Church. And to say, that the liuing may receiue them for them, I haue already declared y^t it cannot be done: For if y^e very liuing may not do it for those y^t are li∣uing, much lesse yet may they do it for the dead. And if it were so y^t it mought be done, wherefore also should not y^e other Christiās aswel do it, for their kinsmen and friends which are dead, as y^e priests & the monkes: And if they mought do it in respect of the supper, wherefore mought they not do it in respect of baptisme, yea more iustly, according to their doctrine? for they place so great necessity in the outwarde signe thereof, y^t they do affirme that those cannot be saued which cannot attaine thereunto. For the which cause they haue forged a Limbe for the children which are dead without baptisme,* 1.285 the which according

to their diuinitie, is at the least as it were a halfe hel. If then it be so, y^t the necessitie be such,* 1.286 & that y^e one may receiue the sacraments for the other, & namely the priests & the monkes, they should haue greater reason to practise the same rather in the baptisme, thē in the supper, forsomuch as according to their doctrine, there is much grea∣ter daunger to be depriued of baptisme, then of y^e supper. For they do not at al accompt damned, those which doe die not hauing receiued the Supper, as they do those which do die without baptisme. Wherefore is it then that the priestes are not baptized rather for the litle Children which are borne dead,* 1.287 which could not liue vntil they mought receiue baptisme, then to receiue the supper for the liuing, & for the dead, as they vaunt thē selues to do in their masse, saying that they are as it were y^e mouth of y^e whole Church, by the which al the body of the same, and all her members are nourished spiritually?

Chapter xvi.

Of the masses which are celebrated in the ho∣nor of men Saints & womē Saints, & which beare their name, and of the application of thē to all things: & what fruit the masses for the dead mought bring vnto them, although indeed the inuention of the Romaine pur∣gatorie were certaine.

ANd on y^e other side,* 1.288 I aske thē, What need haue they to Sacrifice, or to communicate for y^e Saints which are already in paradise? for, what need haue they so to doe? Nowe if they say y^t they do it in their praise and for their remem∣brance, I answere, y^t Iesus Christe hath not or∣dained his supper,* 1.289 either in the remembrance, or in the praise of any other then of him selfe, & for to yeeld thankes vnto God for his benefits. And therfore he hath not ordained any supper either of S. Peter,* 1.290 or S. Paul or S. Iohn, nor of any of y^e Angels, nor of any mē saints, or womē saints, be they either dead or liuing, but did ordaine onely one which is y^e supper of Iesus Christ: Where∣fore men may not say the like of the Romaine masses, of the which y^e one is of S. Iames, y^e other of S. Philip, & others for this or y^t Saint, in sort as they haue their names diuers, according to y^e Saints to the which they are dedicated, and the persons and the things whereunto the are ap∣plied. For they doe make a Recipe ad omnia, & a medicine for all diseases. I aske them also wherein the sacrifice & cōmunion may serue for y^e dead, the which they do receiue for thē in their masse? For, for y^e first, what sure foundatiō haue they for their fire of purgatory in all the holy scriptures, wherin they do lodge in maner all y^e soules of those y^t are departed, to make thē after ward to pay ransome? And what foundatiō may it haue, more then the sacrifice of y^e masse hath,

forsomuch as it far exceedeth y^e true purgatorie, the which the scripture placeth in y^e onely bloud of Iesus Christ, and in the washing & in the pur∣gacion made by the same?* 1.291 For it is he that hath made it by him selfe, & by the which we are wa∣shed & made cleane by y^e meane of the worde of God, & of faith which purifieth the harts. For it is the price of our raunsome by the which wee are bought, and neither by golde nor siluer, as they do after the vse of y^e Romaine church. And albeit it were so, y^t they could very well proue by good testimonies of the scripture, that there were such a purgatory by fire, yet must they for al that proue that they are able to redeeme & to deliuer the soules from thence, by the sacrifices, & communions which they haue in their masses, & such other meanes which they haue inuented to the same effect: And vnder the shadowe of the which things they haue gayned, & do gaine yet dayly so great riches, y^t they haue drawen to thē selues the greatest part of the temporall goods of Christendome. Wherfore it is not to be mar∣ueiled at, if they doe endeuour thē selues to kin∣dle & light againe this fornace of purgatory, w^t∣out the which the sacrifice of their masse, & their communiō in the same, should lose a great part of their estimation, & of their rentes & tributes.* 1.292 We may say the like of the satisfactions, which they haue inuented against y^t of Iesus Christ, and against his merite & benefites. For if his be

sufficient, then are theirs of no value. And if it be not sufficiēt, he may not thē be y^e true Christ. And may mortal men do that which he was not able to do, & adde any of theirs to his worke?

Chapter xvii.

How much more commēdable it would be for the Romaine priests to do the office of pa∣stours towards the liuing, & to leaue to the dead the mynistery for the dead.

NOwe it is true that they haue not at al any certaine word of God to declare & to proue any of al this.* 1.293 Whereon then are they groūded? it is not vpō the stone & vpon the rocke: but vp∣on the grauel and vpon the sand. Wherefore it must needes come to passe,* 1.294 wil they or will they not, y^t al this whole building shal at the last fal & tumble into vtter ruine. And therfore it semeth to me y^t they do very wel, to leaue y^e dead apart, & to deale onely w^t the liuing, doing the dutie of good ministers and pastours towards them, as their duty requireth according to the worde of God. For if they dead haue neede of sacrifices, or of sacraments,* 1.295 or of other suffrages and good deedes, y^e Saints which are dead which knowe better their state then we do, & which are also in better estate & more worthy to succour thē, may better do this office then the liuing. And if they cannot do it, if it be necessary y^t some should doe it, it shalbe yet more harde for the liuing to doe it. And at the least, we haue not at al any certain

testimonie in al the holy scriptures, whereby we may be assured that they may doe it, neither y^t it is needful, nor that God doth alow such a worke & y^t it doth profit y^e dead. Thus much then tou∣ching this point, concerning the sacrifice and communion of the masse, aswel for the liuing as for the dead, and y^e applying of the sacrifice & of the benefits of Iesus Christ by the same.

Chapter xviii.

Of praiers for the dead, & of the inuocation of saints in the masse, & of the distinction of the Romaine doctors betwene the aduocates of reconciliation and of intercession.

I Haue yet 2. points, for the 11. & 12. the which I wil touch in briefe.* 1.296 The first is concerning the praiers which they make in y^e masse, wherein we finde 2. faults. The first is concerning those which they make for the dead, [unspec 1] the which we can not accept by meane of y^e reasons which I haue already alleaged, concerning the points which haue not at al any certaine foundation in y^e holy scriptures. Frō whence it foloweth also, y^t faith may haue no place in them, by meane of y^e rea∣sons which I haue already yelded. [unspec 2] The other is touching y^e inuocation of men & womē saints, a∣gainst y^t which we haue also like reasō. Wherun∣to I yet adde y^e great dishonor & outrage which is done to God, & to Iesus Christ our Lorde in such praiers, in that that they be not addressed to

God only, by our only mediator & aduocate Ie∣sus Christ,* 1.297 & by his merit, but also to dead men, and by their intercessions & merits: the which by this meane are put in the place of Iesus Christ the sonne of God, which only is giuen to vs for mediator and aduocate towards y^e father, according to the expresse testimonie of the scrip∣tures: or at y^e least are substituted or ioyned vnto him for companions. And by this meane Iesus Christ i•• robbed if not in al, yet at the least of a great part of his office. Wherfore they may wel alleadge y^t thei do alwaies say, [Note.] By Iesus Christ. For it is not enough that they take him for me∣diator & aduocate, but they must also giue this honor to him alone, without ioining vnto him a∣ny other felowes, or any other merit to his. And they may not here alleadge their distinction of aduocates,* 1.298 & mediators, of reconciliatiō, & of in∣tercession, attributing the first to Iesus Christ, & the second to men and women Saints which are dead. For by what testimonies of y^e Scrip∣tures may they proue & mainteine it?* 1.299 For y^e cō∣clusion which they make from the liuing to the dead, is not good at al. For it foloweth not at al, y^t if the liuing do pray and may pray the one for the other in this life, that they may in like sort pray for the dead, & the dead in like sort for thē, be they men or womē. Saints, or of what con∣dition soeuer els they be. For we haue commā∣dement

and promise for the first concerning the liuing, in a great nomber of passages,* 1.300 and such as are very plaine in y^e holy scriptures: But we haue not one, onely for the other two. [Note.] And on the other side, when it is commaunded to the li∣uing to pray for the liuing, it is not to the end y^t the one should be aduocates towards God for y^e others, or toward Iesus Christ, but onely to ex∣ercise their charitie the one towardes the other, because that they do knowe, both the necessities & infirmities whereunto they are subiect, but y^e like is not of the dead. The same is also done to the end that God may be glorified by many, as Saint Paul doth witnesse. And therefore he,* 1.301 which mought be aduocate for others, how of∣ten doth he desire the praiers of the other faith∣ful for him during this life? and did he euer pro∣mise or teach, that he or any other of y^e Apostles & other holy personages would pray after their death for thē, & for y^e other liuing, or also for the dead?* 1.302 Wherefore I will alway conclude infal∣libly, that such praiers are made without faith, only by opinion and humaine fantasie. From whence it also foloweth, y^t they are sinne, & dis∣pleasing God.

Chapter xix.

Of the Collects of the auncient Church, & of those of the masse: & of the Deacons, aswell of the one as of the other, & of their office.

THe other point, which is the twelfth & y^e last, is touching y^e Collects of y^e aunciēt Church, & those of y^e masse, & his offertories. I haue alrea∣dy declared in an other place, howe y^t y^e auncient Church had collects & almes for y^e poore ioyued to their assemblies,* 1.303 & namely to thadministratiō of the supper, and that for the same cause it had also his deacons, which had y^e charge & dispensa∣tion, & the care & special regard to y^e poore, to y^e end y^t al mought be distributed in good order ac∣cording to the necessitie of euery of thē. There∣fore, when the faithful mette in their assemblies,* 1.304 & namely vpon the day of the Supper, euery of them did bring according to his power y^t which he would giue, as wel for the helpe and mainte∣nance of y^e poore, as for y^e other charges which y^e Church did ordinaryly endure. And y^e deacons did receiue & gather the same which euery one brought of their owne free wil,* 1.305 without any cō∣straint, & thē they did husband and distribute the same so wel, & by so good order, & in such faith∣fulnes, that the almes of the faithfull were not giuen but only vnto those to whom they ought to be giuen and had neede thereof.* 1.306 And by this meane, euen as the poore were not left in ne∣cessitie, no more were the idle & loytering ones nourished in their idlenes by the meane thereof. And they also which had wherewith to mayn∣taine them selues otherwise, did not eate at al, y^e goods of the poore. [Note.] But the cleane contrary

is now done in y^e masse & in y^e Romaine Church. She hath not only deacōs but also Subdeacōs and Archdeacons:* 1.307 but they are but vaine titles, which haue not ioyned vnto them the office which they doe signifie: but are greatly different from those of the which y^e scripture mēcioneth. For they are such but in name, as are all y^e other ministers & officers of y^e Romaine Church,* 1.308 y^t which do keepe wel y^e aunciēt names & titles of y^e true ministers of y^e auncient Church, w^t those which they haue added vnto thē by their owne inuention: but o∣thers must be sought which must execute their office. For these kind of men are well contented w^t y^e titles, & y^e benefices the which they do enioy vnder the shadowe thereof, without taking any care at all for the office. Euē so is it of their dea∣cons, Subdeacons & archdeacōs. For they haue not in al their clergie any that are appointed to haue any care for the poore, nor to distribute vn∣to thē any of y^e goods of y^e Church, nor of the of∣ferings which are offered in the same. For the goods of y^e Church are no more in y^e Romaine Church y^e goods of y^e poore:* 1.309 but y^e goods of the rich, which do so deuide it w^t y^e poore, y^t they take al to thē selues, & doe leaue nothing, or else very litle for y^e poore. They haue indeed in their masse y^e offertory in stead of y^e collects of the ancients. But that which is there receiued, is not for the

poore, but for the priests and the monkes, which deuide the spoile among them.

Chapter xx.

Of the Charge which is giuen to Archdea∣cons, deacons, & subdeacons in the Romain Church, & of the offertories of the masse of the same.

ANd in the meane time their deacons, Sub∣deacons & Archdeacons, are occupied but in foolish & vain ceremonies, as it appeareth aswel by the charge which is giuen vnto thē, whē they are appointed to their mynisterie, by their By∣shops or suffragans, as by y^e also which is writ∣ten of their office in their bookes, & by y^e execu∣tiō of the same. There are in their masse praiers, to wit,* 1.310 those which goe before the reading or y^e singing of the Epistle, y^t which they do cal Col∣lects. But in the meane time there is no collec∣tion made for the poore. And the Doacons and Subdeacons which should gather the same, & should distribute them after ward to y^e poore, do there none other thing, but that the one singeth the Epistle & the other the Gospel, which is to say, some piece aswel of the one as of the other, yea often times very euil & vnaptly shaped. And as for y^e rest they do serue the priest which doth administer the masse, [Note.] in the ceremonies which he hath to do, & chiefly to gather the offerings of y^e offertorie, y^t which as I haue already said, come not so farre as to the poore. And yet they do not

this office, but in solemne masses & such as they do sing with a loude voice: for in the others, it is sufficient to haue some pety clarke to answere thē, & to serue the priest which is at y^e altar. And as touching the offertorie, it is not so in euery mans libertie, either to go or not to go thereun∣to, but that there is also constraint thereunto, chiefly in certaine feastes of the yere, & namely in those which they do call solemne. For there is certaine tribute laid vpon aswel men as women at the least vpon fathers & mothers of houshold, which they must thē bring to the offertorie. And albeit y^t the curats haue their benefices & cures certenly rented, yet for al that they say that y^t is their right, as are many other impostes which they do impose to their parochians, aswel for the liuing as for the dead, & aswel for thadministra∣tion of their sacraments, as for their other cere∣monies, superstitions & Idolatries. If the same be not done in euery place after one sort, yet it is done notwithstanding. For they doe not any thing freely & for nought. Thus much concer∣ning this latter point, the which we do also con∣demne in the Romaine masse: the which albeit y^t it be not of the proper substance of the Supper, yet for all that, I thought good to set forth the same, because y^t y^e auncient Church was not w^t∣out these Collects, & namely when they did ce∣lebrate y^e supper: of y^t which they did also leuy y^e bread & the wine y^t they did distribute to y^e faith∣full

in the fame, the which were there dedicated & cōsecrated in such sort as I haue here tofore al∣ready declared to be there signes of the body & of the bloud of the Lorde.

Chapter xxi.

A briefe gathering of the matters handled in this booke.

I Do omit very many other points, forsomuch as I wold only bring forth such as were most principal & most intolerable, the which we may in no wise allowe, without reiecting of Iesus Christ, & ouerthrowing wholy al the sacrament of y^e holy supper, & obseruation therem of y^e true aunciēt Church. No more haue I also determi∣ned to make many proofs, the more to confirme that which I haue set forth, against the points y^t which we do condemne, aswel because that the arguments, which I haue brought forth to the same purpose, may suffice such as wilbe satiffied with reason, and will not fight against all ma∣nyfest trueth, as for that also, that I haue hand∣led these matters very largely in diuers other bookes, in the which men shal finde arguments, & testimonies sufficient to confirme more large∣ly y^t, which I haue here handled more briefely. And forsomuch as the Romaine doctors and ca∣tholikes doe make their chiefe buckler of the sa∣crifice,

and of the order of Melchisedec,* 1.311 for the defence of their masse and of the sacrifice of the same, I haue made an other booke of purpose vpon that matter, in the which I doe shewe by apparant testimonies & arguments, taken out of the holy scriptures, howe that the foundation which they lay vpon that order of Melchisedec, doeth more shake downe y^e building which they do build thereupon, thē it doth sustaine it, & how contrary it is to the Sacrifices that they would build thereupon. Wherefore I will nowe end this treatise, [Note.] wherein I haue first set foorth the principal reasons which mought leade the Ro∣maine catholikes to maintaine their masse, as they do maintaine it, to the which I haue made answere. And then I haue set forth the points which doe leade the catholikes of the reformed Church to reiect the same, being such as it is at this present in the Romaine Church. For as I haue already declared, wee are not at all in controuersie concerning the institution, and obseruation of the Sacrament of the Sup∣per, the which we doe all confesse: but the different is, whether the masse, such as it is at this day in vse in the Romaine Church, be this Sacrament of the holy Supper or no, & whe∣ther it be y^e true supper (or else if they wil cal it y^e masse) of y^e true aunciēt Church, or else an other

bastard masse, into the 〈…〉〈…〉 the supper of the Lorde, ••••d the forme 〈◊〉〈◊〉 diuine seruice of the true auncient Ch•••••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 bene conuerted and transformed. 〈…〉〈…〉 I haue reduced these principal 〈…〉〈…〉 ••••ereof we are in controuer∣sie with 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••••••••raine catholikes, and the which I haue han••••ed here before, first into fiue, of the which I haue also deuided some into diuers arti∣cles, in sort that in the whole I make to the nomber of xii. by that order that they are set downe in the table, placed in the be ginning of this booke after the Aduertise∣ment.

FINIS.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Isai. 29. Mat. 15 Mark. 7
• * 1.2

  ••••maunde
• * 1.3

  ••••ndry ••••••nes of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 supper.
• * 1.4

  Of go•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.5

  Instru••••∣tion.
• * 1.6

  Simili∣tude.
• * 1.7

  ••ee, ••••e. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 1.
• * 1.8

  ••ee.
• * 1.9

  5. point••.
• * 1.10

  Deut. 4.1•• Apoc. 22. Jos. 1. Eze. 10.
• * 1.11

  1. Cor. 11.
• * 1.12

  ••or. 12.
• * 1.13

  ••oc. 22.
• * 1.14

  ••••te well 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.15

  ••onclusiō.
• * 1.16

  ••. Cor. 11.
• * 1.17

  High mas∣••••s.
• * 1.18

  Iustinia•• new Const 123.
• * 1.19

  In excellēt Instruc∣••••on.
• * 1.20

  Note well ••his.
• * 1.21

  Matt. 28. Note wel ••his.
• * 1.22

  Mat. 26. Mark. 14. Luk. 22.1. Cor. 11. Note.
• * 1.23

  Iere. 23.
• * 1.24

  ••ote well ••••is.
• * 1.25

  The fau•••• of the p••••∣ple.
• * 1.26

  Note well.
• * 1.27

  Demand
• * 1.28

  Note the well.
• * 1.29

  Note well.
• * 1.30

  Note wel.
• * 1.31

  Example.
• * 1.32

  An oth••••
• * 1.33

  Exod. 3.
• * 1.34

  Aug. in Ioh. Ho•••• 13.
• * 1.35

  ••••ene. 17. ••••••t. 13.
• * 1.36

  Note wel•• this.
• * 1.37

  ••ote.
• * 1.38

  ••egenera∣••••on.
• * 1.39

  Conu•••••• this we••••.
• * 1.40

  Note w••••
• * 1.41

  Way wel•• this.
• * 1.42

  Note th••
• * 1.43

  ••say. 29. ••••g. in ••oh. Hom. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.44

  ••eplie.
• * 1.45

  ••swere.
• * 1.46

  Cōsider ve¦ry welthre•• poynts.
• * 1.47

  Consyder this.
• * 1.48

  Excellēt instruc∣tion.
• * 1.49

  Example.
• * 1.50

  A good in∣struction.
• * 1.51

  Example.
• * 1.52

  Consyd•••• this well.
• * 1.53

  Cōmuni∣cantes.
• * 1.54

  A good lesson.
• * 1.55

  ••ote.
• * 1.56

  August. de ciuit. dei. lib. 21. c. 25. & In 10. Tra. 26. c. 6.
• * 1.57

  3. things in a true sa∣crament.
• * 1.58

  Example.
• * 1.59

  Conclu∣sion.
• * 1.60

  ••pinion of ••he Roman∣••istes.
• * 1.61

  Conclusiō.
• * 1.62

  Note this.
• * 1.63

  ••mande.
• * 1.64

  ••ote this
• * 1.65

  Con••••o•• this.
• * 1.66

  ••at ••••gs are ••••mon & ••••per to ••se sacra∣••uts.
• * 1.67

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 good in∣••uction.
• * 1.68

  ••oh••. 18.11
• * 1.69

  Note this ansplan∣••tion.
• * 1.70

  ••n. 15.
• * 1.71

  ••••gnifica∣••••••n of bap∣••••••me.
• * 1.72

  ••••m. 6. ••••l. 3.
• * 1.73

  Note these propofiti∣ons.
• * 1.74

  ••acramē∣•• speches ••••d their ••••••••e vse.
• * 1.75

  Note 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.76

  ••••te well ••••s.
• * 1.77

  Signes ••••gniftyng thing sig∣••ifted.
• * 1.78

  Note this
• * 1.79

  Note th•• argume••
• * 1.80

  An othe•• argumen••
• * 1.81

  other ••ument.
• * 1.82

  Note well his argu∣ment.
• * 1.83

  Mirac••••
• * 1.84

  Workes naturall supernat••∣rall.
• * 1.85

  ••nfider ••s absur∣••••e.
• * 1.86

  ••gument.
• * 1.87

  Note thi••
• * 1.88

  great ab∣••ditie.
• * 1.89

  ••ngnlar struction
• * 1.90

  ••••ample.
• * 1.91

  Note 〈◊〉〈◊〉 distinct••
• * 1.92

  Instruct••
• * 1.93

  Or vain imaginat••¦ons, or phanta∣sies.
• * 1.94

  ••ote.
• * 1.95

  Note wel.
• * 1.96

  Acticle•• our fai•••• cleane o•••• thrown••
• * 1.97

  Note th••
• * 1.98

  Con•••••• well 〈◊〉〈◊〉 chapte••••
• * 1.99

  Take t•••• worde of God in h•• true sense.
• * 1.100

  ••onsider ••ell this ••••atter.
• * 1.101

  Exposition in matter of sacra∣ments.
• * 1.102

  Note this.
• * 1.103

  Note th•• matter.
• * 1.104

  Note this well.
• * 1.105

  ••e first ••our.
• * 1.106

  ••icer. de. ••at. deo. li. 3.
• * 1.107

  Affirma∣tion.
• * 1.108

  Note t•••• idolatrie.
• * 1.109

  Luk. 22.•• 1. Cor. 11.
• * 1.110

  Consider this well.
• * 1.111

  Abuse of the Persi∣ans.
• * 1.112

  ••ote well.
• * 1.113

  Where the ••se of the ••cramēt is
• * 1.114

  Doctri•• of the a•• uersarie
• * 1.115

  Note t•• argume
• * 1.116

  Rom. 14
• * 1.117

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 ordi∣••e of the ••de vio∣••ed and ••ane ouer∣••owne.
• * 1.118

  ••surditie.
• * 1.119

  Demande.
• * 1.120

  Consyde•• this.
• * 1.121

  ••ote.
• * 1.122

  ••onsides ••is.
• * 1.123

  ••ur God ••s inuisible
• * 1.124

  An i••••i••∣ble world
• * 1.125

  He must 〈◊〉〈◊〉 worshipp•••• in spirit & trueth. Iohn. 4.
• * 1.126

  The very words of the Lord
• * 1.127

  ••ranssub∣••antiation ••••onght in∣•••• y^e church ••bout the ••••ert 1060.
• * 1.128

  Nicholas ••he second. Gregorie ••e seuēth.
• * 1.129

  Honorius the third. 1226.
• * 1.130

  Urban the fourth.
• * 1.131

  Note we this.
• * 1.132

  Romaine Apostles.
• * 1.133

  ••. point.
• * 1.134

  Note this cunning.
• * 1.135

  Conside•• well this point con∣cerning sa∣crifice.
• * 1.136

  Demande
• * 1.137

  Note this cunning.
• * 1.138

  Note this combat.
• * 1.139

  Note the ••stitution 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Lord
• * 1.140

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 matter ••f great ••aight.
• * 1.141

  Iesus Christ the priest, sacri∣ficer, sacri∣fice, temple and altar.
• * 1.142

  Blouddy 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not bloud••
• * 1.143

  Note this. Demande.
• * 1.144

  ••om. 5. ••undry sa∣••••fices.
• * 1.145

  Rom. 12. Psal. 50. Hebru. 13.
• * 1.146

  Auncient celebration of the sup∣per.
• * 1.147

  Not sacrifi∣ces propi∣ciatories.
• * 1.148

  The whole life of christ was a per∣petual sacri∣fice.
• * 1.149

  Iohn. 19.
• * 1.150

  Actes. 4. things in singular re∣cōmendaciō
• * 1.151

  The first deceite.
• * 1.152

  Sacrific•• not blou••
• * 1.153

  An argu∣ment of great waight.
• * 1.154

  Confider his well
• * 1.155

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 cōmaun∣dement.
• * 1.156

  Luke. 22. 1. Cor. 11.
• * 1.157

  One Lord gaue him selfe for vs vpon the crosse.
• * 1.158

  Note th•• Ebrew n••∣ner of speach.
• * 1.159

  The latin translator
• * 1.160

  ••••te.
• * 1.161

  Consider this
• * 1.162

  2. Dece••
• * 1.163

  ••ante of ••••fts men
• * 1.164

  Replc••
• * 1.165

  ••we••••.
• * 1.166

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.167

  ••ry. 53 ••hu. 1. ••et. 2. ••or. 5. ••hu. 19.
• * 1.168

  ••••od. 12.13.
• * 1.169

  A doubl•• regarde y^e passeo
• * 1.170

  Our del••∣uerauce
• * 1.171

  Sacrific•• with sa••••∣ment.
• * 1.172

  ••or. 5.
• * 1.173

  ••••••••de•• ••his ••ge.
• * 1.174

  Note th••
• * 1.175

  Exod. 12.
• * 1.176

  Mat. 26. Mar. 14. Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11.
• * 1.177

  The word•• of Moise••
• * 1.178

  words ••ar lord.
• * 1.179

  ••fferent.
• * 1.180

  Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11.
• * 1.181

  Falsaries of the testa∣ment.
• * 1.182

  ••om. 6. ••eb. 9.
• * 1.183

  The vertue if this sa∣rifice.
• * 1.184

  Propicia∣torie sacri∣fice by wh••••
• * 1.185

  Intent of Christ.
• * 1.186

  ••••se.
• * 1.187

  ••ote well ••••s.
• * 1.188

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 most sin∣••••lar note.
• * 1.189

  ••bedience ••etter then ••••crifice.
• * 1.190

  Who is a ••ufficient ••ostie to God.
• * 1.191

  Consyd•• well thi••
• * 1.192

  Way well this cōclu¦siō throug••¦out.
• * 1.193

  ••••hu. 14.
• * 1.194

  ••traunge ••••nsequen∣••••s.
• * 1.195

  ••he vertue ••f these cō∣••••quences.
• * 1.196

  Vertue ••••¦finite.
• * 1.197

  This sacr••¦fice may not be rei••∣terated.
• * 1.198

  Sacrifice cōmemo∣ratiue.
• * 1.199

  ••niuty ••••one by the ••omaine ••••iests.
• * 1.200

  ••illain ••••affique.
• * 1.201

  ••emande.
• * 1.202

  Stella cle••••∣corum.
• * 1.203

  Matt. 21. Mar. 11. Luk. 19. Iohn. 2.
• * 1.204

  Eze. 1••.
• * 1.205

  A notable argument.
• * 1.206

  ••o sell one thing for an other.
• * 1.207

  Now the supper in•••• be the sup∣per.
• * 1.208

  ••emande.
• * 1.209

  1. Cor. 11.
• * 1.210

  Note these two thing••
• * 1.211

  ••oce wel.
• * 1.212

  ••onc. ••onst. ••es. 13.
• * 1.213

  Consider ••ell this.
• * 1.214

  Replie.
• * 1.215

  Demaund.
• * 1.216

  An other demaund.
• * 1.217

  Demaund.
• * 1.218

  Vicars.
• * 1.219

  Excōmu∣nication.
• * 1.220

  Note thi•• instructi••••
• * 1.221

  Excommu¦nication.
• * 1.222

  Consider well this.
• * 1.223

  The exco••∣municate•• of the aun∣cient Church.
• * 1.224

  ••otable ••••lts.
• * 1.225

  1. Cor. 1••
• * 1.226

  Note th•• abuse of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Supper.
• * 1.227

  Example.
• * 1.228

  ••acramēt 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vnion.
• * 1.229

  Cor. 10.
• * 1.230

  Iohn. 11.
• * 1.231

  Note this ••••struction
• * 1.232

  ••blessed ••nion.
• * 1.233

  Note thi•• diuision.
• * 1.234

  ••ote this ••fference.
• * 1.235

  Note th•• inequalit••
• * 1.236

  ••e gods the ••estes.
• * 1.237

  ••hat gods 〈◊〉〈◊〉 offered 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sacrifice.
• * 1.238

  Mat. 26. Mar. 14. Luke. 22. Actes. 2.1. Cor. 10.11. Esai. 58.
• * 1.239

  ••ote.
• * 1.240

  Horrible deceite.
• * 1.241

  Note this.
• * 1.242

  Note th•• instructi••••
• * 1.243

  Note the names.
• * 1.244

  ••ote this ••••••truction.
• * 1.245

  Note these ••archaun∣••ises.
• * 1.246

  Note 〈◊〉〈◊〉 these ca••∣ses folo••∣ing.
• * 1.247

  ••••nclusiō.
• * 1.248

  ••emande.
• * 1.249

  A worthy sentence.
• * 1.250

  ••••n. 10.
• * 1.251

  ••onsyder ••••ll this.
• * 1.252

  ••om. 10.
• * 1.253

  ••hat faith 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.254

  ••xample.
• * 1.255

  ••••a. 2. ••om. 2.
• * 1.256

  Note wel this chap∣ter.
• * 1.257

  Aug. in Ioa•• Ho. 80. & cō∣tra Faust. li. 16. & de do∣ctr. Chri. li. 11.
• * 1.258

  ••••••uctiō meane ••he sacra¦••••nts.
• * 1.259

  ••ote this ••imparisō.
• * 1.260

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 good in∣••••ruction.
• * 1.261

  God dist••••∣buteth h•• graces as pleaseth him.
• * 1.262

  Example.
• * 1.263

  ••••ample.
• * 1.264

  ••onsider ••••ll this ••tructiō.
• * 1.265

  Note. Ephe. 5.
• * 1.266

  Rom. 6. 1. Cor. 10
• * 1.267

  Note we•• this in∣struction.
• * 1.268

  Iohn. 6.
• * 1.269

  An horri∣••le sacri∣••edge. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 true say∣••ng.
• * 1.270

  Note this.
• * 1.271

  De Con∣dist. 2. C. qum. ••omne. Oriestes Iubaistes. Note.
• * 1.272

  Duran. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 lib. 4. Ru•••• de fract. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Bonau. i•• Sed dist. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Hilper. i•• Ele. de E••∣cha.
• * 1.273

  Note the•• faultes.
• * 1.274

  ••••••ment.
• * 1.275

  ••••te.
• * 1.276

  ••••t••. 14. ••••b. 11.
• * 1.277

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 other ••••ofe. ••om. 10.
• * 1.278

  ••ote.
• * 1.279

  ••onsyber ••••ll this.
• * 1.280

  Esai. 2•• Mat. 1•• Mat. 7.
• * 1.281

  Note 〈◊〉〈◊〉 couclu••••••••••
• * 1.282

  No••••
• * 1.283

  ••••aund ••••••at ••••quence
• * 1.284

  ••••••der 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.285

  ••••••e.
• * 1.286

  Note this.
• * 1.287

  Deman••••
• * 1.288

  ••••hee ••••und.
• * 1.289

  ••••swer.
• * 1.290

  ••ote.
• * 1.291

  Hebr•• 1. Co•• Ephe•• 1. Iōh•• Apo. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Iohn•• Acte•• 1. T•••• 1. Pe••••••
• * 1.292

  Hort•• treas•••• gain•••• sus 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.293

  ••••ndaciō maine.
• * 1.294

  infalli∣censure.
• * 1.295

  ••ote very ••ell this.
• * 1.296

  2 poi••••
• * 1.297

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 3.8. ••••n 2. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 9.10. ••••hn. 2.
• * 1.298

  ••istinctiō aduo∣••tes.
• * 1.299

  ••emaund.
• * 1.300

  Co•••• deme•••• promi••
• * 1.301

  2. Co••••
• * 1.302

  Con••••
• * 1.303

  ••mes. ••••tes. 2.4. Cor. 16. Cor. 8 9. ••al. 1.8, 6. Tim. 3.
• * 1.304

  ••ote this ••der.
• * 1.305

  Thes. 3.
• * 1.306

  Tim. 5.
• * 1.307

  Note here y^t th autor spea∣keth of these offices, as they are in the corruption of the Romaine Church, & not of those that in good reformed Churches are di∣ligent preaching Arch dea∣cons, Deacons, &c. for such be not vaine titles but ne∣cessary offices.
• * 1.308

  Actes. 6.1. Tim. 3.
• * 1.309

  Dery gre¦sacriledg••
• * 1.310

  Consider his wel
• * 1.311

  Sacri•••••• of Mel••••••¦sedec.