THe tyme & worlde now being suche, that there is made no sermon or trea­tise so vaine & idle, but it findeth one or other to print it, and that, not without Grace & Priuilege obtained: I doe not mistrust readie par­don of you (my dere frinde M.N.) if I da­re write my minde vnto you, in any kinde of disputable question. For, if my sayin­ges be alowable: they may be profitable to more then one, and be knowen of [...]un­drie persons for all the lacke of print. & if they be not in some parte altogether so exact and perfect: my forgetfulnes or vnskilfulnes, may receaue better aduise­ment & instruction, when they shall not be past the amendinge, bicause they are not auctorised Cum Gratia & priuilegio ad Septennium. It moueth me also to write, that whereas, according to the blessed will & gift of God, I may perchaunce come, [Page] before I end this life, vnto open defence & shewing of my fayth, it shalbe therfore profitable and necessarie, to practise with my pen in the chambre, that, which may be and should be openly confessed with mouth, ether in churche or consistorie. And further, my hart being so iustely greued, wyth the lowd exprobration, that the called Bishoppe of Salisburie made, vnto all the hostes of the [...]od of Israel, although I be but a common souldiar e­mong the orders of diuines, & must ther­fore kepe my place, wich is, to stand be­hind so many Bishoppes, Doctors, Bachelers, & Scholars in diuinitie, which in the fore fronte ar sett to fight, and although my course be not yet com, to meete with the party hand to hand, and face to face, yet, the harte being greued, and desire of def [...]ce arising with in me, the hand is moued, & with such weapōs as it hath, pen, incke, & paper, it doth what it can, to the ouerthrow of him, which standeth vpon his own wordes, so stedfastly. And verely I doe thinke, if M. Iuell him selfe should presently vnderstand, what I entend: and [Page] should herafter see what I write, he would be nothing at all displeased with my re­plying, except perchaunce bicause I am not cunning and learned inowgh to sett vpō hym, which is so well prepared, that he prouoketh the best of all the armie of the Catholikes, and so prouoketh them, that if they can bringe against him, but one sentēce for example, owt of all their armorie of coūcells, doctors, vsage of the primitiue Church, or scripture, (that is to say) yf thei can fasten but one blowe vpon him, then he will yelde vtterly and geue ouer in plaine feild, vnto them.

Which opinion, of thinking one Catho­like to be to weake for him, yf it can entre in to so noble a harte (as it is very harde to kepe it owt therof) then, must he vse som indifferency, and take no skorne, if a M. of Art and studient of Diuinitie goe aboute the practise, of breaking his blo­wes and assertions, wheras the church of God, so well ordered with excellent men of learning & godlines, is constrained to suffer, coblers, weauers, tinkers, tanners, kardemakers, tapsters, gailers, fidlers, and [Page] other of like professiō, not onlie to enter into disputing with her, but also to clime vp into pulpetes within her iurisdiction, and to kepe the place of Priestes & ministers of the misteries of God, before her face. VVhich thing being tolerated (if not alowed) in these our blessed daies, if M. Iuell were Metropolitane of the real­me, he should not disdaine (as I think) to be sett vpon by a verie meane scholar.

But his wisdome is such, that he will not marke so much, what person it is which speaketh, as what matter it is, which shal­be spoken: and so desirous he is (as it appeareth) of one to encounter with him, that, rather then he will lacke occasiō to vtter his learning, he will suppose in his mind one to stande against him with di­uers obiections, which he is trymlie pre­pared alreadie to answer, prouided al­waies that he wil obiect him selfe no mo­re, then he is able to answer. And when, somwhat is for a fassion sake rehersed, then for the rest, that he will triumph so­lempnelie, as though all were ouercom. VVherfore being sufficiently moued to [Page 3] write, because first, so great licences ar 1 graunted in these daies. then, bicause of mine owne exercise, and also for the ea­sing 2 of my minde in this chalenge made vnto Catholikes. and last of all, for that I 3 thinke, M. Iuell him selfe would take this matter so well, (if he did know it) that he would nothing be offended with the occasion, wherby he may shewfurthe his manhood, I will therfore write, without all sparing of him, (for who can hurt not oneli such a Goliath, with a brason head, but also such a preacher, with a brason face), without all sparing therfore, will I write, as before the face of God, and his blessed Angells, and all holy Martirs, Cō ­fessors, Doctors, and Bishoppes, not one­ly which were six hundred yeres after the ascension of Christ, but also which haue ben these nine hundred yeres last passed, in which time God was knowē, as he promised to make his name great emong the Gentils, and that no power, no not hell gates them selues, Esa. 54. Psal. [...]1. Malach. 1. Matth. 16. should preuaile against his Catholike Church. In the sight of this our God, and vnder the witnes of so [Page] blessed, glorious, and diuine company, I will declare your great florishing, to be far from all kinde of good fighting, and that all your talke, M. Iuell, hath more of the worde then of the sworde, with much mouing, and litle prouing.

VVould not a man think, that the per­son, which vseth such a posy in the first side of his sermon, were one which did much embrace old customes? How can they be but very heretikes, which appea­le onely to the writen worde, and refuse all other profe, which is not expressely in the liuely scriptures of the Lorde? Be­hold here is a testimony of the Councell of Nice, alleaged and alowed, by the Bi­shopp that is called of Salisbury, sett as a golden claspe, vnto his pretious Sermon, which he pronounced at Paules crosse, [Page 4] the secōd Sonday before Easter, and it is this, Let old customes preuaile. But where is this saing, in all Scripture? begin at Genesis and read to the end of the re­uelatiōs of S. Ihon, and shew the chap­ [...]er where this cōmaundemēt or counsel is? we knowe (except your owne Pro­phetes doe lye) that all thinges neces­sary for saluation are writen in the boke of life the olde and new Testament, we reade him to be accu [...]sed which addeth or diminisheth to or from the worde of the liuinge Lorde, we are abundantly content wyth the Bible in Englishe, Apo. vlt. we goe no further, then to God his owne worde. Will yow bring vs againe to harken to old customes? and the sen­tence of the Councell of Nice, which was but of men, shall that be our touche stone? O Sir, when you haue caused all Sacramentes, in a manner, and all Sacra­mentall thinges to be taken away: when, of so many externall signes and tokens, which represented the misteries of our saluation, so few are left: when yow haue taken away the very orders of them, [Page] which liued after the perfectest way of Christ hys religion, do yow now speake of old customes? This doth so well be­com you to speake, as a Saduce to proue the resurrection. as an Arrian to be ruled by tradition. as a woman to weare a mi­tre. Yow would laugh or wondre at a catholike, or (as you terme him) a papist, if he should sett furth his work with this title, that nothing is to be beleued, which is not expressely in Scripture: and shall Protestantes escape the like iudge­ment, when they speake sentēces, for old customes and vsages? But what meane yow by this sentence: Let old customes preuail? what is that, which is against them, that the victory neadeth to be ge­uen to them, by the arbitrement of the noble Councell of Nice? except ther be some battell, ther can be no victory. ther is no preuailing, where there is no resis­ting. and there must, at the lest, be two partes, when one singularly is preferred. I remembre well, M. Iuel mistaketh the wordes of the coūcell of Nice. that these wordes: Let old customes preuaile, are in the begin­ning of the sixt Canon of the Coūcel of [Page 5] Nice, where it is writen, as concerning the iurisdiction of the Bishopp of Alex­andria and Antioch, that the old cus­tom, which euer before was vsed, should continu. But in that sense, it can not serue for a sentence, to be placed before M. Iuell his Sermon, that, bicause the old custome shall stand, which hath ben ob­serued about the Bishopprickes of Alex­andria and Antioch, therfore absolutely old customes should preuail. Wherfore vnderstanding by these wordes, Let old customes preuail, such a generall sense, as M. Iuell would pretend, that the Coun­cell of Nice might vse those wordes ge­nerally: I aske then now, what is this, which the Councell speaketh of, Let old customes preuaile? what might the occa­sion be, of that sentēce? did it meane, that old customes must be preferred before new? this is not alwaies trew. Wheras the circumstances of time, person, age, and such like, may cause the old custome not to be refused absolutely as nawght, but to yeld for iust causes vnto the new. Example wherof we haue, in washing of [Page] feete, Io. 13. Act. 15. and abstaining from the eating of bloud, which was a custome of old, but in these daies, the newer, and diuers from that, is preferred and folowed. VVell thē, 2 did the Councell meane that olde custo­mes must ouercome new bokes and wri­tinges? Surely then M. Iuell, from Luther hitherto, at one foyne, vnaduisedlie, you haue pricked so many authors of new in­uentiōs, as haue found worke, for a num­ber of yeres, to a multitude of hasty printers. But yf none of these senses please 3 you, did the Councell signifye, that olde customes must preuaile, against the pre­tensed alleaging of the very Scripture it selfe, and new doctrine of men? If this be trew, M. Iuell hinderith his owne side, by the alleging, of the Coun­cel of Nice yea rather bicause it is trew, that they must preuaile in deed, by your own allegatiō of this place, you haue put that sentēce for a defence vnto your sermon, which being rightly vnderstāded, doth at once ouerthrow your religiō. Consider now therfore the state of the Church at those daies, and the cause of that Coūcel, if perchaunce we may finde out the sense of these wordes, after your allegation:

[Page 6] [...]. Let olde customes preuaile, and [...]ere away the victory.

Arrius was a proud new fangled man, a disobedient person vnto his Bishopp, which made much of him at the begin­ning, before he toke harte of singularite vpon him, and promoted him to the ho­norable rome of a priest in Alexandria. Wel may I vse the worde, honorable, for at those dayes, priesthood was so ta­ken among all Christians. Alexāder then which was Bishopp of Alexādria a very meeke and reuerēd Father, vnderstāding his priest Arrius to busie him selfe with new inuentions, first gently and fatherly, he warned him: and whē Arrius proude harte and gloriouse, would be nothing the better for sweete wordes and admo­nitions: the wise and blessed Bishopp ga­thering a Synode of his clergie iustly did excommunicate, that singular and blas­phemous heretik. But for all the excom­municating of the heretik, both he and his heresy had a great sort of euill par­takers with them: so far forth, that it was necessary, to call a generall Councell, to [Page] the determining of the Catholike faith, and condemning of new found learning. In which Councell the holy fathers a­gainst the new termes of Arrius, did principally alleage, the traditions of the A­postles, and customes, māners, and lawes of the holy writers before their daies.

And although they had Scriptures for thē against Arrius, yet the chefest stay of their cause, was grounded vpon the ca­tholike receaued faith. For herein cōsis­ted the vnrulines of Arrius, that expoun­ding the Scriptures vntruly, according to his owne fancy, he would not be re­formed, by the interpretation of old fa­thers, and submit his faith vnto their iudgemētes. Which yf he would haue done, the churche of God had neuer ben so much trobled, with that abhominable heresy. [...]rid and [...] for [...]. And that, not onely Arrius, but al his felowes besides, were so affected to­wardes them selfes and their owne deui­ses, and against the expositiōs of fathers: it appeareth plainly by an Epistle of A­lexander Bishopp of Alexandria, [...] 14. writen vnto Alexander Bishopp of Constanti­nople, [Page 7] in the which, towardes the la­ter end with in two leaues, these faul­tes of the Arrians be declared.

Thus thē loe the Arrians, being so much selfe minded, what better remedy might the reuerēd fathers of Nice haue against them, then to bring furth the former re­ceaued 1 doctrine and māner: to establish that with their decree? For, if natural rea­son shall preuaile: the Christian faith can 2 not be so wel perswaded, or rather it can not be perswaded at all. If by Scriptures only, the treuth shalbe decided: then shal 3 ther neuer be found any end, wher both parties alleage the wordes of Scripture for them selues. why the heretikes admit only scripture, and the fathers old customes also. Only therfor tradition, custome, and māner, is that thing, which killeth the heretikes hartes (and therfore they will not be iudged but by expresse Scripture only) and it is the thing, which defendeth the Catholike Christians, and therfore gladly doe they folow the waies of the auncient fathers. VVhich thing is plainly proued by this honorable Coū ­cell of Nice, about which our talke is. For, as it appeareth by the actes of the same Councell, after long disputatiō and [Page 8] learned, betwene certaine philosophers, (hired of purpose by Arrius, in defence of his cause) and most excellent fathers inspired with the holy ghoste, for the vttering of the truth: ‘ It pleased (saieth the history) all the fathers vnto one, In [...] Conc. Niceni that like as it was deliuered from the holy fathers and suc­cessors of the Apostells: so they should decree [...], (wich is to say the equality of substance in God the Sonne with the Fa­ther) and prouide it to be put, in the Crede of the Church.’ Against which worde [...] and decree of the fathers, what did Arrius or any of his sect afterwardes al­leage, to the reprouing therof? (And you in the meane time (my welbeloued frind. N.) thinke it not long which is not vnprofitable, and chose out the tyme to reade that quietly, which the cause requireth that I should write plainly.) What did the Arriās then (sayd I) argue against [...]? what was their chefest & best reason? for soth this onely, that it was not in Scripture. O M. Iuell, that your eloquence had not ben born at those daies: you would haue stode greatly a­gainst them with your, [...]. [Page] Let old customes and manners win and preuail. But yet you may doe good seruice in these daies, to perswade with the multitude of them, which take them selues wiser then all other, which haue ben these nine hundred yeres, and which will beleue nothing but the writen wor­de and bare letter: that olde customes must be regarded and preferred also.

I mislike not the saying, but it agreeth not with your person, as I beleue. Ca­tholikes may, all the company of them, alleage truly both scripture and custo­me. heretikes, doe pretend Scripture onely, and that yet not truly, but custom they can neuer alleage at all. This we haue receaued from the Apostells and their successors, saith the Councell of Nice [...], is not in all the scripture, saieth the heretike. And as euery cun­try, is distincted one from a nother, by proper and peculiar language: so doth the Catholike euer speake after the voi­ce of the Churche, and the heretike ba­bleth onely after the letter of the boke. Reade you the fifth Chapter of the Tri­partite [Page 9] history the fourth boke. There it is plaine, that Constantin the great, did put a chaplaine of his in trust, for the deliuery of his testament, Hist. trip. li. 4. ca. 5. to Constan­tius his sonne. which chaplaine, being in deede an Arrian, and hauing accesse to the Emperor and acquaintance with him, by occasion of the testament, per­ceauing also the yong Emperor his mind to be vnstable and wauering, To refuse vnwriten verities, the old w [...]nt of heretikes. what persuasion did he vse first of all as you think?

He saied (as Theodoretus testifieth) they were to blame, which had put the worde, Consubstanciall, among the articles of the faith.

And why so? which worde (saieth he) is not writen in all the Scripture. Loe here is his greatest reason, and such in deed as becometh heretikes most of all. Let vs goe yet forward, and seke whether any mo heretikes will vse that reason. And where shall you more plainly find this matter, then where the very pack of them is gathered together. In a cōfession of a faith, which was made at Sirmium, Constātius him selfe being present, with to many Arrian Bishoppes, after other [Page] thinges, this decree foloweth.

As for the worde (substance:) bicause, Trip. hist. lib. 5. c. 20 being simply put furth by the fathers, it is not knowē of the common people, and it maketh a scanda­lum and offence: and bicause, neither the Scri­ptures haue this worde in them: it pleaseth vs, it should be abrogated, and hereafter no mention at all to be made of substance in God, bicause the Scriptures diuine, do in no place make mentiō of the substāce of the father and the sonne. You may see what great price they ma­de of this argument (it is no Scripture, ergo no matter of faith.) bicause that in so few lines, they doe twise repete the selfe same reason. Which vndoutedly was then, and is now, the very principall (but not most surest) stay, of all vnconstant mindes. As in the same boke againe, see what a no­ther cōpany of scismatikes do speake for them selues, against the Coūcell of Nice? VVe (say they) which are gathered together in Seleucia, Trip. hist. lib. 5. c. 34 which is in Isauria. we haue yesterday, which was the fifth before the Kal. of Octobre, geuen all diligence, according to the Emperor his will, to kepe straitly the ecclesiastical peace, and to thinke earnestly vpon the faith, as our welbeloued Emperor Constātius hath cōmaun­ded, according to the sainges of the prophetes and Ghospells, and to bring furth nothing, be­sides [Page 10] the Scriptures in the matter of the faith Ecclesiastical. This againe doth proue my purpose, that it is propre to the hereti­kes to appeale to the scriptures onely, bicause they are quickly condemned by tradition, custome, and manner.

To conclude therfor this place, Arrius being so proud, as we haue said, hauing many textes of Scripture for him: as he vnderstood them which toke him selfe to be best learned, the Councell of Nice defining the cōsubstantiality of God the Sonne with the Father: bicause they had so receaued it from the Apostells by their successors, the same Councell being all­waies reproued of heretikes, for that it defined that matter as an article of faith, which was not in Scripture: I aske now, what it is like that the Councell did me­ane, when it should say, Let old customes and manners preuaile? Can it well be vn­derstood otherwise, (if the wordes be taken generally, as you M. Iuell doe al­leage them) then after this sort? that for as much as heretikes can alleage for them selues Scripture, and will not be [Page] brought down from their priuat sense to vnderstand those Scriptures, as old bles­sed fathers haue interpreted them, that herefor to make an end, and to stopp the mo [...]thes of all arrogant persons, we will and define, that old fassions, old custo­mes, aunciēt interpretatiōs, and so furth, shal preuail? For the question here in this 1 Coūcel, was not, of custome & custome, traditiō & traditiō, which should preuaile: for the Arriā did medle with no tradition, 2 or former custome, or vsage. Neither was the questiō, in cōparing former vsage with some late writers inuention: for Ar­rius would alleage no one mans writing, taking him felfe to be better learned thē all other. and if he would haue alleaged his owne authority only, that had ben so folishe and diueli [...]he, that it was to be re­serued for Luther (or some other of the priuy coūsell of Antichrist:) Wherin then was the strife? not in those two pointes which I haue named, but in this onely, 3 that wheras Arrius would be tried by scri­ptures only, and plentifully brought them out, for a shew of his defence, and wheras [Page 11] vnder the letter of the scripture, he vtte­red his blasphemous sprit, and went a­gainst the plain traditiōs, and lessons of the Apostells and fathers of Christ his Church. therfore (saieth the Councell) Let old customes and māners preuaile, what the Councell meaneth sayng, let old custo­mes pre­uaile. which is to say, we alow scripture, and we allea­ge scripture, but after that sort, that we must not, ne will admit any thing con­trary vnto the Apostolike faith receaued, for as concerning your text, (Sir Arrius) where you say, Iohā. 14. Pronerb. [...] The father is greater then I am. And againe, God made me in the begin­ning of his waies, with such like, they must be vnderstood as our [...]decessors, maisters and fathers haue deliuered vnto vs. neither must you (bring you in neuer so many places of the old or new testamēt) think therfor, that you may conclud a sense and meaning contrary to the old faith. Away with this pride of yours, submit your vn­derstanding to the faith of the Churche, leue of your new termes of extātibus and non extantibus, receaue the [...] and cōsubstancialitie (which word although it be not expressed in Scripture, yet it is [Page] in tradition,) Consent and agree with the Councell of the whole world. These wordes loe and such like, doe expresse truly, what the fathers should meane in saing, Let the old customes preuaile. And this being proued, to be the very mea­ning of that worthy sentence, what hath M. Iuell doon, in setting it before his ser­mon in the first shew therof? is it put there, to be laughed at, or to be folowed and regarded? If to be laughed at: the Coūcell of Nice is not so simple a thing. If to be folowed: why are the Catholi­kes reproued then, for defending aun­cient traditions? and why are the here­tikes honored which will haue nothing but [...]he bare text onely, together with their priuat comment vpon it? If custo­mes, manners, fashions, vsages (call it as you will) if they must preuaile: wherfore doe we all this while, contend with the Protestantes, vpon verities writen and vnwriten, vpon traditions and vses of the Catholike Churche? Euery boke almost which is of common places, hath the question of Scripture and traditiō moued [Page 12] therin, which nedeth no more to be any question, you being so well acquainted (M. Iuell) with the Protestantes, and ha­uing so great credit among them, as they lightly can geue to such a person. For at one worde you shall end the whole mat­ter, perswading them, that old customes and fashions must preuaile, which in my minde I thinke to be impossible, (but nothing is hard perchaunce, to you,) for this is clere euen in sight, the last and third communion is preferred before the second, the second better estemed then the first, and if a new one come furth, you shall (I warrant you) see it plainly proued, that, quite against your will, and against the Councell of Nice, the old fa­shions shall not be preferred. And this much hitherto I haue saied, as cōcerning old customes, supposing and graunting, that the Coūcell of Nice might vse that sentēce, as M. Iuell alleageth it, for a ge­nerall conclusion and determination, whereas in very dede those wordes [...] ar onely mentioned in the beginning of the sixt Canon as con­cerning [Page] one especiall matter, about the prerogatiue of the sees of the Bishopp of Antioch and Alexandria, and should not therfore be drawen vnto a generall sen­tence. But we shall meet again with M. Iuell, vpon this point, before the end, I thinke, and therfore now, will I turne o­uer the lease, and cōsider his sainges, and apply som answers, and infer, so well as I can, som obiections against him. ‘VVhen so euer any ordre, geuen by God, is brokē or abused, Iuell. the best redresse therof is, to restore it againe into the state that it first was in at the begnining.’ If you take the paines leisurly to consi­der the illation of this conclusion, you shall perceaue the wordes of the blessed Apostle vnto S. Timothe, the first epistle & chapter, to haue in these our daies the persons vnto whom they may and must be applied. 1. ad Tim. cap. 1. ‘ The end of the cōmaundemēt is charite, which cometh out from a pure harte, and good conscience, and vnfained faith [...] from which certen men wandering a side, are tur­ned vnto vaine talke, coueting to be teachers of the law, not vnders [...]anding, (yet) neither [Page 13] the thinges which they speake, neither vpon what thinges they make affirmatiōs’ M. Iuel here in the wordes which I haue reci­ted, maketh mention of an ordre geuen by God, and of ordre broken, and of re­dresse of the same by retorn to the first institution. In whiche sainge can he tell what he speaketh? or what, and wherfore he affirmeth? what ordre geuen by God, did he talk of before, to bring in the wor­des thus, when anye ordre geuen by God is broken? &c. In the third leafe he saith, that S. Paule had appointed the Corinthias as touching the Sacrament, that they shold all eate and drink together. Doth he call this, the ordre geuen by God? I beleue verely, that what soeuer S. Paule appoin­ted, the same did come from God, as the principall gouernour of his churche. But for all that, there is great difference, be­twixt the cōmaundmentes expressely ge­uen by God, A differēce betwen th [...] cōmande­mentes of god & the ordinances of men. & ordres set by men as mini­sters of God. For with the one kind, non can dispence, withowte especiall licence frō God. and in the other kinde, the hea­des of the church haue the power in ther [Page] owne handes, without further question, to sett and remoue, plant and pull vp, as they shal see it profitable for the present state of the churche. Wherfore although the blessed Apostle did neuer make such ordres vpon his own head, as did not a­gree with the will of almighty God: yet (properly to speak) an ordre geuen by God, is so to be taken, that, without all exception, it must be kept and folowed, without speciall reuelation for the dis­continewing of the same ordre. And or­dres which men appoint, may be chaun­ged again by men. What then meaneth M. Iuell by these wordes, VVhen any or­dre geuen by God is broken? and let him plainly also shew, wherin the ordre con­sisted, and who did break it? The ordre was this, (as it appeareth by the learned cōmentaries of the blessed fathers vpon that .xj. chapter of the first to the Corin­thians. Theoph. cap. 11. 1. ad Cor.) On their holy daies and appointed feastes, (according to an old custome of the Churche) the Corinthians did vse, riche and poore, altogether in cōmon, to eate & drink. and that, of common meates and drinkes.

[Page 14] Which meetinges and suppers were cal­led in the Grek tongue [...] (as other do write) bicause of their charitable sit­ting and eating together. Now (as S. Au­sten writeth) after the supper ended, they did receaue the Sacramēt. But as S. Chri­sostom thinketh, they did first receaue the Sacrament, and then sett them selues to supper. But were the Sacramēt recea­ued after or before, and to come to Theophilactus again, afterward, (saieth he) Dis­sentions arising among them, that meruelous or excellent manner (which had much cha­ritie, and not a litle Christian philosophy in it) was taken away, & kept no longer of the Corinthians. How was it taken away?

Bicause they did now sitt a sondre, as, [...] ­che by them selues, or kindredes with kindredes, or by families, or other waies deuided, wherby the poore folkes, which before did put their handes freely in the riche mens disshes, whiles they sat Chris­tianlike at one table together, they now poore sowles in deede & hungrie, were caused to [...]itt by them selues, & had no benefit of their euen Christians plentie. [Page] With which singularitie of the riche men S. Paule was iustly offended, and saied, VVhen you com together in one, 1. Cor. 11. this is not it, to eate our Lord his supper. For euery one of you doth take his owne supper before, and eate. In which wordes, our Lord his supper, is vnderstood (as Theophilactus writeth) that meeting and eating toge­ther of theirs, which was instituted and receaued, as in folowing of that reue­rend and worshipfull supper of our Lord in deed. Here vpon now, S. Paule study­ing for the redresse of this ordre, among other argumentes (by which he would persuade them quietly, and without dis­daine or murmur to sitt together as they were wont to doe) he bringeth in for one principall argument, the doinges of our Sauior in his last supper, saying, I haue receaued of our Lord, that which I haue deliuered vnto you, 1. Cor. 11. and so forth.

As if he should haue saied more plain­ly: my frindes, you doe vse in your mee­tinges together, to kepe separate tables and to put away the poore from you, throwgh a certaine cōtempt, perchaun­ce, [Page 15] or disdaine of them. Which you are much to blame to doe. For seing our Sa­uior in his last supper geuing his owne body to be eaten, did not make partes thereof, and vnequall diuision, that som should haue al, and other should goe wi­thout: and wheras you also do receaue; at these present suppers of your owne that very body of his: it is to absurd that towardes your neighbours, and bro­thers, you should vse this straingenes, as though they were not worthy to eate of your bocherly fleshly meate with you, or com nigh vnto your tables: which a [...] made partakers with you of the body of our Sauior, and of the heauenly table.

Thus then you may see, how the wordes of S. Paule depend orderly one vpon an other, and what the ordre was with the breakinge of whiche he was offended. And wher vpon then doe these wordes of M. Iuell folow I haue receaued of the Lord? &c. 1. Cor. 11 But let vs now yet debate this matter more plentifully. The or­dre once receaued was, that they should make ther common supper all togeth [...]r, [Page] of such meates as they would bring, and either before (as S. Chrisostom his opi­nion is) or after Epist. 118. [...]d lanuar. (as S. Austen vnderstan­deth it) they should receaue the Sacra­ment. Well this ordre is broken. But why did you break it, o ye Corinthians? why did ye lett either enuie, disdaine, pride, glotome, or any other vncleane thought, so to entre into your hartes, and so to ta­ke place there, that wheras before, to the maintenaunce of charitie, your tables in the church were common: now, to the discomforting of the simple and poore, ye make to your selues priuate and sin­gular banketes? If you seeke onely for good chere: you haue howses of your owne meeter for that purpose, then the church. But if nedes you wil supp in the church, after the old fasshion: let your meates be common vnto the rest, which shalbe there gathered as the old fasshion was. We see a manifest disordre, and most lamētable. som be dronken, bicause of to much. other be fainte, bicause of to litle. Do ye cōtemne the church of god? Do ye cōfound & make to blushe others [Page 16] which haue nothing? But what remedie? Mary, saith M. Iuell, let vs bring the mat­ter to the first ordre geuen, & correct the abuse, by reducinge of the case vnto the first vse thereof. Doe so then as you say. amend this disordre of the Corinthians. tell them what they haue to folow. shew forth the trew fasshion, and ordre, 1. Cor. 11. which must be vsed. I haue receaued of the Lor­de (saieth M. Iuell) that thing which I al­so haue deliuered vnto you. that is, that the Lorde Ihesus in the night that he was be­traied, toke bread, &c. But to what purpo­se is this? we haue shewed before, that the disordre among the Corinthians consisted cheifly in this, that they did one cōtemne another, and would not sitt to­gether (as the old fashion was) but ma­ke straunge one of another. for a redresse herof (sayeth M. Iuell in the third leafe) S. Paule calleth them back to the first ori­ginall, Iuell. and to the institution of Christ from whence they were fallen. If this be so, tell me I pray you, what one worde is ther sownd▪ in the institutiō of Christ, which maketh for sitting together or sitting a [Page] sondre, for eating at church or eating at home, for particular banket or common supper? Christ his institution doth he­re in consist, that, 1. Cor. 11. He tooke breade, he bra­ke breade, he gaue it vnto his disciples, and saied, take ye, eate ye, this is my body, which shalbe deliuered for you, doe ye this in re­membraunce of me. But our talke, is a­bout the reforming of a custome which is broken, and I aske you, how you will amend this separate manner of eating and drinking, which the Corinthians doe vse in the churche? I know that Christ did take bread, did breake it, did geue it. But answer me, how the good Christi­ans were wont to meet together, and how they did vse to sitt and eate, wheras the Apostle doth [...]ind fault with the Co­rinthians for their disordre of eating in the churche: not eating onely of our Lord his body, (which if they did mi­stake, then the wordes which you allea­ge of the institution of Christ, would serue well for that purpose) but eating of their owne supper, which they brought to churche with them. When you spea­ke [Page 17] of reducing thinges to their origi­nall, and when it is clere, that the Co­rinthians in their meetinges together, did not kepe the old custome and man­ner, I looked to heare of you, not the in­stitution of Christ, what that was, but the old fasshions which the Corinthians should kepe, as for those wordes of the institution of Christ, which S. Paule re­herseth, they are writen of him, not, as the originall patern of the reforming the Corinthians disordre: but in way of ar­gument, (as Theophilactus saieth) to proue his principall purpose, that bicause Christ, did not spare to geue his owne body vnto his disciples and folowers: therfore the riche Corinthiās should not dis­daine to admitt the poorer sort of Chri­stians their brethern vnto their table. for therin was the blessed Apostle occuped, to correct the stoutnes & singularitie which the Corinthiās vsed then, otherwise then it was receaued emōg Christiās. And therfore S. Paule being mindful of his intēt & principal matter, he cōcludeth the chap­ter with these wordes: therfor my brothers [Page] (saith he) when ye com together to eate: tary and looke one for another. If any one be hungry: let him eate at home. Shortly therfore to conclude this matter, truth it is, that when any disordre is com into the churche: the first ordre, from which the fall was made, should be reduced. The disordre amonge the Corinthians, was, that they did not charitably cōmunicate together in their suppers. let this be a­mended. the Apostle doth it properly, saing. Therfore, when ye com together to ea­te, tary one for another. M. Iuel vnderstādeth not the [...] place which he brīgeth out of the first vnto the Corin­thias ca. 1 [...]. For so was it at the beginning, that the Christians did meere and sitt altogether, and eate one of an o­thers meate in their Churches, and either after such their meales, receaue the Sa­cramēt, or before them. All this agreeth well. But let M. Iuel amend the disordre, and sett euery man in his place. Let them be called backe again Iuell. (saieth he) to the first originall, and to the institution of Christ.

Which answereth, as rightly to the que­stion proponed as if in a deliberatiō, how the beggars & needy persons of England might be prouided for, som great clerke [Page 18] wold stand vp & solemly declare vnto vs, vnto what valew of our currant mony the three hūdred pence would com vnto, for which the oyntment that was poured v­pon our Sauior his head, might haue ben sold for, according vnto Iudas his esti­mation. Or (as it is more familiar with Englishe eares) which is the way to London? A potte full of plūmes. Yet doe they glory still vpon the institution of Christ, as though those wordes, Take, eate, this is my body, doe this in remembrāce of me, did appoint both time, and place, and vesture, and nombre of cōmunican­tes, and all thinges which they vse in ministring of their what shal I cal it? (treuly I can not tell,) and which the trew ca­tholike churche hath or may vse, in the ministring, adorning, or defensing of the Sacramēt. But let it be graunted (which is to far absurd) that S. Paule did reduce the Corinthiās from their disordre vnto the first originall & institutiō of Christ, and that he vpon the originall of Christ his institutiō did cōclude, that one should tary for another when they cam to eate. [Page] How doth it now then so fal out, that ac­cording to the redresse which the Apost­le made after the originall of Christ his institutiō, Christian men bring not their meates to the church, and the riche ta­rieth not for the poore, and he which a­boundeth, geueth not gladly vnto him which lacketh? And when they are wel re­fresshed with cōmon meates, then receiue the Sacramēt? Yea rather, you, which ap­peale so lowdly and rudely to the insti­tutiō of Christ, The incons [...]anci [...] of heretikes. why do ye not washe one anothers feete, which haue so expresse & euident a text for it? Where is now your originall, and where is the institution of Christ? if both kindes be not receaued of the laye people: O then institution of Christ, how far ar we departed from the? say they. And the same Christ saing, Ioan. 13. I haue geuen you an example, that like as I haue done so should you do, and washe one anothers feete, they are content herein to let institution and originall both goe. And so, like as bells do sound in diuers mens eares diuersly, and diuersly in one selfe same eare, as the mind is affected: [Page 19] so Scripture and custome are made to sound in these mens fancy, euen as their [...] is to haue this or that opinion to goe forward. When it pleaseth them: [...] the bells shall goe, VVith customes of p [...]matiue churche, examples of good men, testimonies of blessed Doctors. And when so great a sound doth troble their stu­die, then loe it pleaseth them to haue one bell onely to ring, VVith nothing is to be beleued without expresse worde of Scri­pture. But now let vs goe further. ‘It was to be hoped, for so much as the glo­rious light of the Ghospel of Christ, Iuell. is now so mightely and so far spred abrode, that no man would lightly misse his way, as a [...]ore in the time of darknes, and peris­she wilfully.’ I could not but note this sentēce, bicause it conteineth so great a bost and so small treuth in it. For where is the glorious light of the Ghospell now so mightely and so far sprede abrode? and what cal­leth he the darkenes of the time afore? many new found landes, & the wild In­dians are come to the faith of Christ in [Page] our daies: but had protestantes and he­retikes the ministery therof? or els reli­gious men, monkes & friers, with other such of the catholike church? Note a most eui­dent lye of M. Iuels. how ma­ny partes of Italie, of Spaine, of Fraūce, of Germany, of [...]laundres, of other con­tries of Europe, doe acknowlege this glorious light which he talketh of? Yea, what one city can he name, in the which it is mightely blased abrode? Frankford, doth it wholie agree within it self in one faith? Geneua, is it wholy ouershadowed with this counterfaict light? In England, or London, or in Sarum vnder his owne preachinges, is the Ghospell gloriously and mightely spred abrode? The king­dom of the Ghospell of Christ, is in mens hartes. and then, of how many hartes is M. Iuell assured? of those very contries, which are taken to incline to the new lerninges, three partes, or more, shalbe [...]ownd, in harte and will, Catholikes.

And yet graunt him, that any one citie is al [...]ogether turned from Christ and his church, so that no one Papist in harte, shal there remaine: by & by is the Ghos­pell [Page 20] mightely and far spred abrode? The­re is no more but one Ghospell, but of Ghospellers more then sixe kindes in e­uery contrie, There is one Ghospell, but diuers Ghospel­lers. which the glorious light of the Ghospell hath now oueruewed. M. Iuell him self doth he know any one, to be of the same faith of which he him self is? if he agree in all pointes with any o­ther, how cometh that to passe? either thei haue one master, which kepeth them both vnder correction, that they shal not play the wantons, but hold that, which he teacheth: or els voluntarilie, and at pleasure they agree. If voluntarilie and at wil: then is not he sure of an others mind, which may be so often tymes chainged in euery day and howre. If they say one thing bicause of one master and aucto­ritye: let him then plainlie tell vs, the na­me of that person his master. We haue hard of Luther, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, Seruetus, Suenk feldius, of the which euery one did crake of the glorious light of the Ghospel of Christ, which they did beare abrode in their lanthornes. But ther light is not the light of the sonne, but such as [Page] we see in great tempestes, when contrary flashinges of lightening, com one against an other. They did not confort and quic­kē by their doct [...]in▪ but destroy and burn vp quite the grene frutes of deuotion, and pretie. And which then of all these, is your master & ruler? The worde of God, [...]f in these dayes it be com abrode out of darcknes, it cometh not without handes and tongues. who then be your apostles? If there be none: Aedant Origines Ecclesiarūsuar [...]. Lett them shew the b [...]gin­ninges and first rysing of theire churches. Tertull. in [...]script. aduersus haereticos. a great maruel certen­ly, to receaue so great a gift and not to know, frō whence it cam, or who brought it. If there be any: then must you folow your Apostles. But they are all so wel and highly learned, that they disdain to be a­ny mans scholers, as a certen Doctor and called a bishop, perswading with one, that he should read the Doctors with iudge­ment (meaning that in deed the doctors be plainly against them, except one take the place of a iudge vpon him, and defy­ne their verdictes, as it shall please the world, the fle [...]sh, and the diuell) vsed this kind of reason to obtain his purpose. for I my self (ꝙ he) do read Luther with iud­gemēt. O miserable and beggerly religiō. [Page 21] euen Luther him selue, which like a mor­ning, is sayd to haue risen before the light of the ghospell, for whom they blesse the Lord, that in him he reueled his s [...]ne Ih [...] sus Christ (os impudens) yet is he to be rea­den with iudgmēt. But whose iudgemēt? The iudgmēt of the church [...]row you? or iudgmēt of Melanchthon, Bucer, Caluin, or any other? no no▪ for al these are to be readē also, with iudgmēt. And whose iud­gement? forsoth myn owne. Behold then I pray you, is not the Ghospell mightely spred abrode, when all this while no one person liuing, is found on the Protestāte [...] side, which is and must be taken for an vndouted trew preacher of the Ghospel? the Prote­stāte; hath no one [...] ­doubted trew iud­ge, teacher or fayth. Again, suppose that I haue yet no Chri­stendom, and that gladly I wold com to the trew fayth, which is the trew light of my soule: as far and as mightely as it is spred abrode, where yet shall I find it? Let me begin at Sarum church, and doth that agree in al pointes with the Quenes chappell? Let me goe vnto Geneua: and that church, doth it agree in all articles, with England? frō thens bring me abrode [Page] in to Germany: and shall I see the same preachinges vsed, as are in other coun­tries and cities of them which are no pa­pistes? how shall I, which am not yet christened and learned, distinct the Lu­theran, Zuinglian, Anabaptist, Arrian, and more such sectes one from an other? For the blase of the glorious light, which you talke of: is marred by the concurring, of all these flames, together. Wherfor I wonder much, at the vain hope of him, which in these most troblesom and con­trouersious times, would look that euery man should com to the licht of the Gho­spel, which he saieth is mightely spred a­brode. wheras in deed, he him selfe which hoped for many incummynges, doth not yet redely know, whether he be in the right way him self or no. and can not proue to me, whether this which he hol­deth, be the Ghospell of Christ or no, or counterfaicted by som Pope or other, or by som one generall Councell or other, from whose handes we haue receaued it. For if it folow well, and if we may build here vpon oure soules health, that they [Page 22] haue not, [...]aythfullie expounded vnto vs the Ghospell: as easely it may folow, that they haue deliuered vnto vs a false Ghos­pell. And if they may be trusted with the keping of the Ghospell, and that we no­thing doubte, but they haue deliuered it as they receaued it, Consider, whether [...] new Ghos­pel & [...]aith may with any reason be trusted. without interlining, rasing, blotting, and corrupting of it: why should we mistrust them, in the expoun­ding of the same Ghospell? If they had so good conscience, that hauing the te­stament in their keping, they are beleued to haue suppressed or burned, or altered, no part therof: shall we make them on the other side, so wicked and desperate that they would expoūd the same other­wise, then they had receaued? And if we doe stand by it plainly and openly, that they wer so corrupted and blinded, that they haue sensed and interpreted the scri­ptures most vntruly, and most against the glory of God: can we with owt feare, re­ceaue the testament of God and writin­ges of all our health [...]rom them, and no­thing mistrust, lest they haue put in, and put out, for their owne purpose and ad­uantage, [Page] many thinges which God neuer vttered, or which he expreslie cōmaun­ded? Certainly, as mightely, as the talke of the worde of God, and glorious light of the ghospell is spred abrode, bicause of so diuers sectes, which declame against the catholick and Apostolick church: yet, if we considre the case rightly, the very cra­kers of that light, know not for all that, in what suerty of their faith, they be them selues. For they haue forsaken the high way, and what by breaking of ceremoni­es, what by ouerturning of monasteries, what by false libertie of conscience, that they may doe what they will, vnder the name of the crosse of Christ and his pas­sion: they haue so crossed the wayes, and broken down so many hedgis, and tro­den downe so much good corn, & so ma­ny faire pastures of all pietie and deuoti­on: that, except they com back to the be­ginning againe, they can neuer com to good end. Whither be you posting Sir, and please you? vnto heauen? you must ride then a pase for company bycause by your owne confession, these nine hun­dred [Page 23] yeres and more, none did euer take this way which you doe folow. But, where will you bayt by the way? At the signe of the booke with seuen claspes, which is the Ghospell. Sir, then I besech you, what call you the city where that signe is? Mary, Geneua where Caluin readeth. What, if Geneua be destroied, and Caluin burned, or otherwise dead, before you com thither? Whither will you goe then? to the signe of the Gho­spel. And why not to Caluins successors, which may sa [...]ly deliuer you the Ghospel? And then, Geneua being destroied, and Caluin both, what shall the next bayting place be, at which thei may turne in, which look to be saued? or what shall his name be, which is goodmā of the house? Cer­tanly, at this point and turning, they are no more sure of their faith, thē I shold be of my way to the mount Tabor, if I were in the furthest and wildest places of all E­gipt. Bicause they wil trust none but thē selues, and their owne wittines, and as them selues shal cast the way, so will they heare by leisure, what old good fathers do [Page] say, protestātes will stand to theire owne iud­gementes onlye. but yet will they folow their owne inclinatiō, this being inowgh with them all, for the most parte, that my mind and sprit geueth me, this should be the way: ergo this is likely to be the way. And a­gain, the sprite of God, is not in the great scholars and high Bishops or rulers of the world, ergo happy are we the poore and ignorant, which haue neither lerning neither authority. ‘M. Iuell complaineth that som there are this day, M. Iuell. which refuse the cōmunion and runne headlong to the masse. wheras the 1 holy cōmunion, is restored to the vse and 2 forme of the primatiue church. to the sam ordre that was deliuered and appinted by 3 Christ. and after practised by the Apost­les, and cōtineued by the holy doctors and 4 fathers, by the space of [...]iue or six hundred yeres, throughout all the catholike church 5 of Christ. without exception, or any suffi­cient example, to be shewed to the cōtrary.’ I could make short, and say, all is lies. And truly to make short in many places, I shal be constrained, the matter doth so in­crease, together with a iust indignation. Which if I should folow to the vtter­most, I might write a great volume, and [Page 24] yet not com to the end. But as for saying al is lies, without prouing of it, althowgh my negatiō be as free for me in familiar writing, as his affirmation is for him in open pulpetes and preaching: yet bicause I need not to vse such extremity, I will proue, that all together it is falsely a [...]ow­ched, which he writeth in this forsaid sentence. For how first doth this cōmunion agree, with the ordre that was deliuered by Christ? yea rather what ordre of ce­lebrating, did Christ deliuer, which yow can tell of? Ioan. 13. Christ did sit down with his twelue, and after the paschall lambe eaten, he a­rose again, he put of his roobes, he girded him selfe with a linnen cloth, he poured water into a bason, he wasshed his Apostles feet, he satt downe again, he preached, he toke bread, he blessed it, he brake it, he gaue it, saing, this is my body, which shalbe deliuered for you. Mat. 26. And likewise he toke the chalice and blessed it. (as the Ghospell testifieth) and at the last, many godly and comfortable lessons being geuen, and grace ended, he saied to his disciples, Ioan. 14. arise, let vs goe hence. I. there any more abowt the last supper [Page] of Christ, that you can tell of? But how many thinges more, and how many thin­ges lesse hath your ordre in the commu­nion book? Note the Prote­stantes vse manie thinges ī theyr cōmunion which, are not fownd in script: to be by Christ his institutiō. What Scripture haue you for the linnen faire cloth vpon the com­munion table? Where hath Christ deli­uered vnto you, that the preist shall sta [...]d at the north side of the table? Where found you the praiers, collectes, exhor­tations, cōfessions, knelinges doune, stan­dinges vp, and such other fashions, as the cōmunion book hath prescribed? I speak nother of nor on as cōcerning the good­nes and allowance of these thinges, but onely I aske where you had these ordres of Christ? For these be your wordes. that The communion now is restored to the sa­me ordre, that was deliuered, and apointed by Christ. Now, as you haue many thin­ges more in your communion, Also they haue many poyntes lesse, then war doone by Christ at his last supper. as .1. then euer you can proue by expresse Scripture, that owre Sauior vsed in his last supper: so haue you on the other syde, many poin­tes lesse, then yow owght to haue by any dispensation, if Christ were your perfect example. For Christ our Sauior, as he [Page 25] was at supper with his disciples, first and formost toke bread. And how dare you to make your boste, of the exact folowing of the Lorde, Matt. 26. Christ to­ke bread in to his han­des. where as you be ashamed to take your cōmunion bread in to your handes? I will not presse you with the question, whi you doe not communicate at supper tyme (which one might thinke that you would cheifelie doe, being such obseruars and kepers of the actions and procedinges of Christ) but this so reaso­nable and cōsequent point, that (I meane) he which intendeth to worke about any matter shold take it vp in to his hand, and this thing, which Christ hym selfe hath willed vs by his example to do (in taking of the bread, which he minded to conse­crate, in to his holie and reuerēd handes, why do not you remember to folow, and why geue you not furth a general iniun­ction, that euerie minister shal kepe that ceremonie and maner? For although you M. Iuell (as I haue heard saye) doe take the bread in to your handes, whē you ce­lebrate solemply, yet thousandes there are of your inferior ministers whose death it [Page] ys, to be bound vnto any such externall fasshion, and your order of celebrating the cōmunion ys so vnaduisedlie concei­ued, that euery man is left vnto his pry­uate rule or canon, whether he will take the bread into his handes: or lett it stand at the end of the table. Lett it therefore be well marked that first of all you either forgett, or neglect, or be ashamed to fo­low Christ, in taking of bread in to your handes.

2 It foloweth in the Ghospel that Christ dyd blesse. Christ blessed the bread. but what dyd he blesse? vn­dowbtedlie that which he toke in to his handes. And why then doe not yow fo­low Christ, in this action abowt the sa­crament? or leaue craking, that you haue brought your cōmunion vnto that per­fect forme and absolute, at which Christ left it vnto vs? if you will appeale in this place vnto the Iewes, in whose tongue, blessing, ys commonlie takē for thankes geuing, you must then expound vnto vs what thankes Christ dyd geue vnto the breade. For the accusatiue case, which is gouerned of the verbe (Benedixit, he [Page 26] blessed) ys not, Deum or Apostolos, that is, God or his Apostles, but panem, that is bread. Therefore he blessed the bread, and dyd not thank the bread. no he dyd not praise the bread. in which sense (be­nedicere, to blesse) ys oft tymes taken. For how could that holie mynd of his, which alwaies was occupyed vpon highe mat­ters, and which then was most especiallie fullie and excellentlie directed vnto the making of vnspeakable misteries, intend the right seasonyng, or well bakyng, or fayre lockyng, or any other thing worth the praising, in that bread which he toke in to his handes? yf you would or could for your curst stomak & greatnes of hart, folow with quietnes and charitie, the ex­ample and māner of the wholie catho­like church, you shold make the signe of the crosse ouer the bread, and think that Christ hys blessinge of that creature: ys wel, so to be vnderstanded. But as though a thing were the worser, for the signe of the crosse made vppon it, or as thowgh Christ in blessing of the bread, blessed it not in deed, but rather blessed & thanked [Page] his father: so you [...]lee, by all meanes pos­sible, from all such action and gesture, which might seem to cōmend this bread vnto vs, and you haue rather chosen to leaue owt all māner of blessing: then you would be bound to ceremonies, and co­me within order and canons. But whe­ther this agreeth with your crakes and bostinges, that you haue brought the supper of the Lord vnto his first order and perfection (which you, for all that do not blesse the bread, as you should haue lerned by Christ his example and pa­terne) lett any man iudge, which hath but meane reason, and vnderstanding.

Further more, it is in S. Luke, that, lyke­wyse also the chalice, Luce. 22. (vnderstand) Christ gaue. Which word (likewyse) I note, bycause it importeth, that there was a cer­taine especiall manner, which our Sauior vsed in taking and geuing of bread, the which he obserued in taking and delyue­ring of the chalice. And reason, vndoub­tedlie, geueth it, that he, which at other tymes vsed, Matt [...]. 14. most solempne and reuerend gestures, (as in the feeding of fyue thou­sand [Page 27] with fyue barley losses and two fis­shes, Ioan. 11. and in the raysing of Lazarus he vsed blessing, lifting vp of eies, and lowd speakyng) would not in such a tyme, and to­wardes such a purpose, either vse a com­mon attentiō, either a cōmon expressing of his intention. especiallie where as the disciples, with whom he turned in at E­maus, knew him in the breaking of bread, what reuerent gestu­res Christ vsed at his last supper bycause he did it, after such a diuine and solempne ceremonye, as was not vsed of any other, such was his grace therein and his ordenance. O Lord, how affectuous­lie did he take that bread, from the rest which was vpon the table, of the which bread he appoynted to make his owne pretiouse bodye? How reuerentlie did he looke vpp to heauen? How hartelie did he thank his father? How abundantlie did he blesse and halow the bread? either by vsinge the playne signe of a crosse, or by some other expressing of his goodnes which he woulde to come vpon that cre­ature? How attentiuelie did he break it? How hartelie did he bid them to take it? How louingelie did he geue them to eat [Page] it? how mightelie and vnspeakablie did he turne and conuert it? Lyke wyse also he toke and gaue the calice. Surelie if there had ben no matter in the taking and handeling of it, neither the bread (I beleue) neither the wyne was so far frō him, but that he might haue poynted vnto them, with his finger, or looked at the least way vpon them, saying, Take ye, and eate ye, this is my bodye, this is my bloudd. Yet to declare the singulare working of his, which is doone in the bread and wyne, and to make vs the more attent and close in mynd, whi Christ vsed such reuerent gestures at this insti­tution of the Sacra­ment of his bodie and bloud. by the folowinge of his owt­ward gestures, he toke it: separating it (as it were) from the reste of the lyke graine, he blessed it: by some speciall signe or sanctification, such as is not for our common meates, he brake it: to re­present misticallie, the visible tearing of his bodie, which the next day after fo­lowed. He gaue it: to make thē one to­geather with hym, not by faith onlie and charitie: but in verye flessh allso and bo­die. He saied, This is my bodie, this is my bloud: to teach them a true faith in those [Page 28] misteries, and to confirme and establish vs against the obiections, which either heretikes or our senses, 1. Cor. 11 doe make to the discrediting of the Sacramēt. and to cō ­clud. he said, Doe this in remembrance of me: by which he gaue full authoritie of consecrating vnto Priestes, and willed them to folow his example. But can you now (M. Iuel) proue, that you keepe all these thinges in your communion? Re­member, I pray you, the order of it, and consider, that the bread and wyne are layed downe vppon your table, where it pleaseth the sexten or the parish clark to sett them. The new ministers abuse and lacke in celebra­ting Ch­rist his last sup­per. And when the tyme of conse­cration (if all thinges dyd procede right­lie) cummeth, your booke apointeth, no takyng, no blessing, no directing of the mynd to the bread. But lyke as a man should tell a tale: so the minister reci­teth onlie the wordes of the Apostle, and when all is quicklie doone, he taketh the vncōsecrated bread hymselfe and geueth it to other, willing them to be thankfull, and to feed vpon Christ in their hart. In so much, that if a straunger should come [Page] in the meane tyme whiles you be at your cōmunion, he might wonder, why at the end, you make so much of that bread and cupp of wyne, with which all the seruice long before you seemed to haue had so litle to doe, or nothing. For neither by taking, neither blessing, neither direct and intentyue lookyng, it appereth that you work any thing in the bread. And all this not withstandyng, haue you browghte back the cōmunion, vnto that state and perfection, in which Christ delyuered it vnto his Apostles. May you not be asha­med of your vanitie, which crake of the folowing of Christ, and condempne his holie Catholike church, your selues nei­ther takyng, neither blessing, neither cō ­secrating the bread and wyne, as Christ hymselfe did in his last supper shew vn­to vs? Well (M. Iuell) this is one fowle lie of yowres.

Ther foloweth an other, namely, that you haue the same ordre, An other lye of M. Iuells. which was pra­ctised by the Apostles. But it appeareth not either in the Actes of the Apostles, or any of their epistles, what ordre of cōmu­nion [Page 29] they had, In the Actes of the Apost­les it is writē, Act. 2. that they did breake bread in their houses. Act. 13. and agayn, that after the Apostles had fasted and sacrificed, they sent furth S. Paule and Barnabas to ful­fill the holy ghostes cōmaundement, and to preache abrode the Ghospell. But of the ordre, which they vsed in breaking their bread, 1. Cor. 11. or in their sacrifices, nothing is declared precisely. Again, vnto the Corinthians, the blessed Apostle writeth, what he receaued of our Lorde, and te­stifieth therin the verity of the sacramēt, but of the ordre, which is to be obserued, he speaketh so litle, that he endeth that matter with these wordes. As for the rest, when I come my selfe, I wil set in ordre. here be, loe, two foule ones past. ther foloweth the third, which hath many other vnder­neth it. And that lie is, that, the holy cōmunion is restored to the same ordre, which hath been cōtinewed, by the holy doctors & fathers (one) for the space of .v. or .vjC. yeres Manye lye [...] of M. Iuel [...] in one [...] [...]e togeth [...]r (two) through out all the whole Catholike church of Christ (three) without exception or sufficient example to be shewed to the cōtrary (fower) [Page] yet are there some this daye (q, he) that re­fuse it, which is also the fifthe lye, if he take this worde (some) for a small some. Bicause in dede, ther be very many per­sons, which do refuse it, and would glad­lie runne to masse, wherin the Protestātes Cōmunion agreeth not with the primitiue church and old fathers. if there were anye.

But now to shame all these lies, I will bring furthe a few exceptions, by which I shall euidently proue, many thinges yet to lacke in the Cōmunion, of the ordre, which in the primitiue church, was vsed. 1 First of all, you should torne your face towardes the East in your cōmon prayer. Prayer to­ward the East. Iustinue 118. quaest. As it doth appeare by S. Iustin the mar­tyr .118. quest. Bicause (saieth he) we should reserue the most honorable thinges for God, and by all mens iudgement, where the sonne riseth, that is the worthiest part of the wordle. The same also is proued by S. A­thanasius quest .37. Athan. quest. 37 Which alleageth for that purpose the testimonies of the Psal­mes and Prophetes in answering to a Iew & for the answering to a Gentil, he saieth that bicause God is true light, therfor we loke towarde the sight created, and doe not worship the light it selfe but the ma­ker [Page 30] therof. Thirdly to a Christian this he answereth, saing, For this cause the most blessed Apostles did make the churche, of the Christiās to looke towardes the East, that we looking vnto Paradise, from whence we haue fallen, (I meane our old cōtry and land) shold and might desire our God and Lord to bring vs back thither, frō whence being cast out, we are in this banishement. And of this iudge­ment also S. Basil the great, is. And saieth It is a tradition of the Apostles. Basil. de [...]. 5. cap. 27. And with these agreeth S. Austen sayng, when we stand to pray, we torne vnto the East. Lib. de ser. in monte. And why therfore is not this ordre kept in the communion boke but expressely rather it appointeth the Priest to stand at the north side of the table? Is this your con­tinewing in old fathers and doctors or­ders, that yow be assured, no example can be shewed to the contrary of that, which you doe? if you say the standing maketh no matter: suppose it to be so, & wherfore then did you not let thinges stand whē they were wel? or why do ye crake before ignorant people, that you hau [...] the same ordre withowt example to the [Page] cōtrary, which was in the primitiue church and fiue or six hundred yeres after vsed?

Thus, first then you stand not rightly, no more doe ye in the rest accordingly. For where is the water, which you should mingle together with the wine in conse­crating the chalice? why keape you not this auncient approued and receaued or­dre? S. Alexander Bishope of Rome the 2 fifthe after S. Peter saieth: the chalice owght to be mengled with water Neither wine alone, neither water alone, but both mengled together, ought to be offred vp in the chalice of our Lord. as we haue receaued of our fore­fathers, and reason it selfe dothe teache, bi­cause both they are readen to haue gusshed out of his side, when he suffred his passion.

Item, C [...]. Car. 3 ca. 24. the third Councell holden at Car­thage, forbideth that any thing els be of­fered, then our Lord him selfe hath de­liuered and appointed, that is to say, bread and wine mengled with water. Again, S. Cyprian, Cyp. [...]p. 3. lib. 2 in one whole epistle, greatly rebuketh them, which offer vp water al­one, or wine alone. Bicause (he saieth) that our Lorde appointed it so, that wa­ter and wine should be mengled both together, [Page 31] to signifie the ioyning of Christ, and his Church in one. Apoc. 17 For many waters do signifie in the Apocalipse, many peo­ple: so that water mengled with wine, doth well represent the people tempered together, and vnited with Christ. How say you? be not these witnesses sufficient inough? they are within the fiue hūdred yeres which M. Iuell geueth vs leaue to considre, if perchaunce we may find any exception to the contrarye, that the or­dre in the Englishe communion, is not according to the perfect example of that which it should be.

I aske yet once again why, The signe of the crosse owght to be vsed in the communion. the minister of 3 the holy cōmunion, is not commaunded to make the signe of the crosse, when he should consecrate? This also was an old custome. For in S. Iames, and S. Basiles masse, there ys [...] a proper place and tyme before sacring (as we haue called it) in which the preist doth make the signe of the crosse vpon the bread and wyne.

And Tertullian sayeth, Libro de corona milit [...]. that in his tyme it was a generall custome, to make the signe of the crosse in the forhead at euerie comyng in [Page] to the house, at euerie going furth in put­tyng on theire apparell, in sittyng downe at the table, at candelltyde, at beddtyde. How much soner then, dyd they vse that signe in holie misteries. S. Chrisostome also an awncient father, In demōst. aduerssusgent. to. 3. the head (sayeth he) ys not so much decked and set [...]urth with a roy­all crowne, as with the crosse. All men signe them selues with it, [...]mprinting it, in the most noble part that we haue. For in the forehead as it were vpon a piller the figure thereof ys daylie made, so lykewise in the holie ta­ble, so in the makinge of preistes, so againe with the bodie of Christ in the misticall sup­pers, that signe doth florishe. Augustin. tract. 118. in Ioannē. Vnto these .11. fornamed witnesses lett vs take a therde verdict of the blessed S. Austyne, which iudgeth of the crosse in this wyse, that, except it be putt vnto either the forheades of the faithful, either the water with which thei are regenerated and borne againe, wither the oyle with which they are anointed, either the sacrifice with which thei are norished, none of them all ys well done. What then shall we saye? yf M. Iuell hath not thorowghlie readen these awncient doctors, how har­die [Page 32] and hastie was he in reporting, that his communion and his felowes ys restored to the forme of the primitiue church, deliue­red by Christ, practised by the Apostles, cō ­tinued by the holie fathers? and if that he hath readen the holie fathers, and yet cō tempneth their sayinges: what credit is to be geuen vnto his preaching, which plai­eth the hipocrite so notoriouslie? But lett vs make other exceptions.

In the primitiue church, altars were alo­wed emong Christians, altars vsed and halo­wed in the primityue church. vpon which they 4 offered the vnbloudie sacrifice of Christ his bodie: Saynct Paule manifestlie say­ing, we haue an altar, of which they may not eate, which communicate with Idolls. The councell also called Agathense, hath de­creed it, that Altars should be halowed, not onlie with the anoynting of holie oyle, but also the blessing of the preist. Concil. A­gathen. se. cap. 14. Yet yowr cō ­panie (M. Iuell) to declare what folowers thei are of antiquytie, doe accompt it e­mong one of the kyndes of Idolatrie, if one keepe an altar stāding. And in deed, yow folow a certayne antiquitie, not yet of the Catholykes, but of desperate here [Page] tikes. Optatus contra [...]. As Optatus writeth against the Do­natistes, saying: what ys so wicked & thee­wish as to break, to rase, to remoue, the altars of God, vpō which once you did offer? Now if you be of no affinitie with the Donati­stes, answer, for the pulling downe of al­tars, what sprite it was which moued you there vnto?

Againe, in the primityue church, incen­sing at masse, was, of most holie men alo­wed witnesses hereof, are S. Iames in his masse, saying: O Lord [...]hesu Christ, &c. purge vs from all spot, and make vs to stand pure at thy holie altar, that we may offer 5 vnto the a sacrifice of prayse, Perfumes [...]incense vsed in the pri [...]itiue churche. and receiue of vs thy unprofitable seruātes this present per­fume for a sweet sauor, &c. S. Denise also ys a witnes, which emong other thinges write, cōcernyng the order of church ser­uice in his dayes, Ecel. Hie­rarch. ca. 3 telleth, How the Byshop after he hath ended his folie praier, vpon the diuine altar, beginneth at it to burne incen­se & so goeth rounde about the whole church. An other witnes (to lett goe the litur­gies or masses of S. Basile and S. Chriso­stome) shal be S. Ambrose, Amb. li. I. in csp. 1. Luca. which in his cō templation [Page 35] of the comyng of the Angel vnto the highe preist Zacharie, sayeth, And I wold to god, that whiles we incēse the altars, and bring sacrifice thither, the Angel shold stand by vs, and geue hymself to be seen of vs. Now these testimonies M. Iuell, be­ing gathered out of the fiue hūdred yeres after Christ, you were not so wyse vn­doubtedlye as you were bold, in saying your cōmunion to be of that forme and fashion, which the Apostles delyuered and their next folowers receiued.

Furthermore in the primityue church 6 goodlye tapers and lightes were vsed: Lyghtes maintei­ned in the primitiue churche. how read you in the old doctors? were they not? If they were, how be you not a shamed of the darknes, which is gene­rallie in you, and your cōmunion? If you can find no mentiō of lightes in any good auncient doctor: read then S. Augustyne in his sermons vnto the people, August. Ser. 7. de tempor [...] declaring what is the best kynd of vowe. and vtte­ring by that occasiō the manner of good folke in his time, of whō, some did vowe oyle, some wax, to keep light in the night, some, a pall or robe, &c. Which although [Page] he aloweth, yet these are not the best vowes sayeth he. Paulin. in nat. 3. [...]. Foelicis. Read also Paulinus, which vpon S. Felix holidaye, sayeth, ‘Clara coronantur densis altaria lychnis.’ The altars bright: Are rownde I dight, With lampes thick sett, and light.

Read (to be short) S. Hierome, and not onlie read: but regard hym. Read what he iudgeth of Vigilantius, and read what the heretike Vigilātius iudged of church­lightes and tapers. Did not he, lyke a sin­gular and blind Protestant (all be it such then, were not called Protestantes, but knowen well inowghe by the bare name of heretikes) but did not he iest & tawnt at the māner of Catholikes, askyng them whi they lighted tapers at myd noon, the sonne faire shinyng? and askyng further, whether the martyrs which dwell in hea­uen, neede any of our tapers, which tarye on earth? Whose madd brayne for theis, and other lyke sayinges, H [...]ero. ad­uersus Vi­gilantium. [...]oan. 12. S. Hierome no­ted, to require some cure and remedie, and emong other thinges he answereth Vigilantius with these wordes. Neither Christ needed the oyntment (which Marye [Page 34] Magdalene powred vpon hym) Nor martyrs the light of tapers: and yet that woman did that thing in the honor of Christ, and the deuotion of her mynd ys taken, and who so euer do light tapers, they haue theire reward according to their faith. Agayn. Thorowgh all the churches of the East, when the Gho­spell ys a reading, the tapers are lighted, euen when the sonne now shyneth. Not tru­lie to putt darknes awaie, but to shew furth and declare a token of ioye and gladnes.

For this matter therefore M. Iuell, I will leaue you vnto holie S. Hierome, to see whether you and he in this [...]ynt can a­gree any thing togeather. and whether he can patientlie suffer you, after so e­uident customes to the contrarie, to cra­ke that you haue browght the commu­nion vnto that forme which it had at the begynnyng.

Shal I make any more exceptions against you, or haue I sayd to much allreadie for your profite and credite emong the ig­norant? Many surelie wil think and saie vnto them selues, that if my Lord Iuell preached these thinges in open pulpite, [Page] he was well aduysed before, what he would saye, and vndoubtedlie he hath how to answer, how so euer these papi­stes alleage the Doctors. Which felowes verilie haue to greate an opinion of the man, and they may seeme to offend of purpose, which wil not see most manifest thinges, and such which are cōprehended by the owtward and carnal senses. Many heresies of old were verie subtile, and of much shew of vertue, in so much, that right lerned and good men might haue ben deceaued in them: but the heresies of this tyme are for the most part all, so gros­se, so vnreasonable, so vnnatural, so folish, so much crakyng, so litle performyng, that it ys a woūder, how any man of cō ­mon sense, doth preferr the new before the old religion. For, to note .ij. pointes more, which, the church obserueth as de­lyuered by the Apostles, and which the cō muniō boke hath not in it, for all the bost that is made of it, what honest hart can a­bide to here those bolde wordes, that the cōmuniō is restored to the vse and forme of the primityue churche, when he shall [Page 33] perceaue that praying to the Sainctes, and praying for the dead, Of pray­ing to Sainctes. which the new Ghospellers do vtterlie neglect, was ge­nerallie of old obserued. Is it not sayed manie tymes and oft, in S. Basils masse, lett vs commend our selues one an other and all owr life, Basil. in sua Litur­gia. vnto Christ owr God, hauing in memorie, owr most holie and vndefiled ladie the mother of God, and allwaies virgin Marie, with all the Sain­ctes? Doth he not make an expresse mention of owr ladie, of S. Ihon the Baptist, and of the sainct, whose memorie is kept that daye in the churche, sayinge, Quorū postulationibus visita nos. at whose praiers and requestes visite vs? Chrisost. in Liturg. Doth not Chrisostome in this article agree with Basile & the catholike faith? O Michael (saieth he) which art the cheife captaine of the heauen­lie armie, vnworthy we beseech the to defend vs by thy intercessions, vnder the shadow of thy wynges. Agayn, O ye Apostles, do your message vnto owr mercifull God, that he may geue vnto owr sowles remission of sin­nes. The lyke praier he maketh in effect vnto S. Nycolas and to all the sainctes. [Page] [...] [Page 33] [...] [Page] And whereas holye Sainctes and Martirs are mentioned in the rest of the masse, Chrisost. [...]om. 21. in acta Apo. es­peciallie yet thei are at the tyme of oblation: for it is great honor to them, to be named when their Lord ys present, whē that death ys celebrated, and that dread­full sacrifice, and vnspeakable sacramen­tes. Which was so ordinarie and com­mon a matter, Aug. li. de S. virgin. cap. 45. that S. Augustine in few wordes sayeth, It is well knowen vnto the faithfull, at what [...] place the martyrs and re­ligiouse women or Nunnes departed, are re­hersed at the Sacramentes of the altar.

And agayne, Idem li. 22 de ciu. Dei cap. 10. that we vse not to offer sa­crifice to Martirs, but that in that sacrifice which we offer vp vnto God, the martirs in their place & order are named. Yf yow aske, to what purpose the catholike and true cōmunion should vse the inuocation or namyng of martyrs: (althowgh it be ar­gument sufficient against your cōmuni­on, that it foloweth not the lyke maner, which we find to haue ben receiued in the awncient churche, yet to yelde much herein vnto you) I say either with Chri­sostome in the place forenamed in the [Page 36] that it is the Martirs honor, to be remē ­bred in the presens of their lorde his pre­tiouse bodie. Lib. 20. ca. 21. con­tra Faustū Or I saie with S. Augustine, applying that to our purpose speciallie, which he spake generallie of all Martirs, that, the Christen people doe keepe the memories and commemoration of Mar­tirs, with a religiouse and deuoute solem­nitie, bothe to stir vp in them selues a folowing of them, and also to be made partakers of their merites, and to be hol­pen by their praiers. But the practise of the primityue Church beinge euydent, althowgh the cause of it were not kno­wen, whi vse yow not in yowr commu­nion, an ordinarie inuocation of holie sainctes?

Now if in all other thinges, no oddes betweene yow and the true church might be espied, Praying at masse tyme for the dead. yet the praying for the dead, was in the primityue church so laudable, and in yowr religion it ys so hated, that except, before iudgemēt be geauen, yow alter in that poynt yowr communion, no reason can beare it to be Apostolike.

[Page] Consider by your selues S. Basiles and S. Chrisostomes masses, whether peculiar and proper mention of the dead, be not made in them, to obtaine God his mer­cie for them? Conf. lib. 9. Remember, that S. Augu­stine desireth his brothers and fathers tho priestes, which should reade of the death of his mother, to pray for her at the al­tar. And if you will be loth to turne to these places, and to consider them accor­dinglie, I will pardon you of that labor, trusting that one testymonie will be suf­ficient vnto you, which seeke nothing, but trueth, and are readie to folowe bet­ter councell. The testymonie is Sainct Chrisostomes. Chris. ho­mil. 3. ad Philip. It hath not ben decreed for nought, by the Apostles, (sayeth he) that in the celebration of the venerable misteries, a memorie should be made of them, which haue departed hense. For they knew, that much vantage and profite did come herebie vnto them, &c.

So manie poyntes therefore conside­red, which we find vsed in the primityue churche, and which we lament to see [Page 37] contemned in your vpstart church: can you, for shame of the world, either not folow that, if you know the state of it, or if you doe know litle of it, so boldlie compare your selues with it? You say, that whithout exception and authori­tie to the contrarie, you haue the same order and fasshion which was practised in the auncient church, thorough Chri­stendome, and I doe shew you now half a skore of iust exceptions, of noe small maters, or hard to find, but great and ea­sie to be perceiued. Who therefore might in this place and vantage against yow, geue for God his sake which is trueth, a iust and free sentence betweene vs and you? Who might graunt forth inquisitors and Iudges to sitt vpon it, which of vs two doth folowe the church, and which of vs two doth belie her? how long is it that men halt on both sides?

If our Lord be the God, folow hym: if Baal be, folowe hym. Reg. 3. cap. 18. If Iuell say trueth, lett the Catholikes contynue in their infamie: if the Catholikes proue hym a lier, goe vp­right, [Page] and halt not with a false legg. This cōmunion of yowrs M. Iuell, is no more lyke the masse, office, or seruice, which the Catholikes vsed in the first fyue hun­dred yeares after Christ: then a fowre crabb is lyke a sweete orenge. But as so­me man might folishlie say of an other, he is lyke King Arture the famouse, by­cause he sitteth at a rownd table, or hath perchaunse some part of a gesture, which (as he hath readen in Chronicles) be­cummed King Arture verie well, whereas in all kynd of manlines, he is more neerer a ducke then a duke, so (that I may be quietlie suffered, to cōpare thinges sim­ple and temporall, with those great mat­ters and euerlasting) these obscure Pro­testantes, bycause they presume all of them to receiue vnder both kyndes, as Christ did vnto his Apostles onely, deli­uer them both, (as teaching them how to celebrate that daylie sacrifice) and bi­cause they will not receaue, except they be a company of them together: loe, say they, we be the folowers of Christ, and [Page 38] his Apostles, and of the primitiue church as far as fiue hundred yeres goe, (for there we leaue them) and we haue the light of the Ghospell, after so long a night of ni­ne hundred yeres and more, and our or­dre of the holy communion, is the same which Christ deliuered, (o good bro­thers) and the Apostles receaued, and the Doctors and Fathers continewed, with­out any exception, which can be made to the contrary. Wheras in deede, you may see, in how many, and how principall thinges, they forsake quite the true ordre of the primitiue church. But shall they be so suffered for euer? ‘True it is, the Sacrament is an holy thing, M. Iuell fol. 8. the ordinance of Christ, the mystery of our saluation. Yet, is there nothing so good, no ordinance so holy, no mystery so heauenly, but through the foly andx frowardnes of man, it may be abused.’ From this place forward, many leafes to­gether, he proueth that thinges may be abused: and reckoneth vp certein abuses, which haue chaunced about the Sacra­mētes. [Page] and if I take him [...]ardie but in one, he must be gilty in all, bicause he allea­geth all with like faith and integritie, and willeth him selfe to be takē as he is, if he be found ouercom, but in one thing onely. First then, as concerning those, which did baptise the dead, they ar well reproued in the third Coūcel of Cartha­ge, the sixt canon. But here by the way, I note one great vnreasonablenes in tho­se men, which at their pleasure, to serue their turne, doe alleage Councells, and will not yet obey the canons of the same Councells. The 17. canon of this very Councell of Carthage, forbeddeth that no strange women, (that is to say) none, but either mother, grandmother. Aunt by the father or mothers side, sisters, and brothers or sisters doughters, either such as wer of household, before they toke or­dres, but besides these, none should dwell together with the cleargie. And now, priestes doe take not onely strangers to their household seruātes, but also to their chambre and bed felowes. The .27. Canō, [Page 39] cōmaundeth water and wine both to be vsed in the sacrifice. The .36. forbeddeth vtterly, that any priest shold cōsecrat holy oyle, for that was reserued to the Bishop only, with whose leaue the priest might cōsecrat virgins. But in these quarters of the world, nother water in sacrifice, no­ther oyle, nother virginitie with cōsecra­tion therof, is alowed of the Protestātes. Reason truly it is, to take a mans whole tale, and not to mangle an auncient Coū cell. Which Councel, if they do not cre­ditt, why then doe they bring the testi­mony of that Councell for profe of their purpose, against which, they bere false witnesse that it is not to be folowed?

But to let this matter to passe: A great abuse is attributed vnto Tertullian, and Sainct Cypriā his tyme, a thousand foure hundred yeres agoe, that the Christians toke the Sacrament home with them.

This was ( [...]aieth M. Iuell) an abuse, and therfore it was broken. But who did break it tell vs? It was broken saieth he. and how doe ye proue this to be an abuse? it was an abuse saieth he. And I say, it was [Page] not. and why not my nay, as good in rea­soning, as your yea. For although the cō ­mēdation of some person hath made you a Bishopp, And, by order of the church, I am a simple priest: yet as good the leg­ges of a larke, as the body of a kyte. If we goe to craking (in dede it is not good, but this yet they would constraine many to do) I wil yeld nomore vnto his aucto­ritie, then reason will require. Yet I may iustly crake, not in my selfe, but vnder the churches auctoritie, and in the name of S. Cyprian and Tertullian. Was that, say you an abuse, to carye the Sacramēt ho­me at those dayes, and receaue it before other meates? I vnderstand what gre­ueth you in this example, of the primi­tiue churche. For it proueth plainly a­gainst you, that euen in so nigh daies vnto Christ, ther was no necessitie to re­ceaue the Sacrament vnder both kindes. And wheras the persequutiō and hatred of Christians, was then so great, that they could not frely meete together in any common and open place, and so quietly serue God, and receaue his benefices, as [Page 40] they desired: can ye blame them, yf the clergie were cōtent, to let the Christians cary home with them, that present com­fort of their soule, (which is the body of Ihesus Christ) to haue it alwaies in redi­nesse, and to strengthen their weaknes therwithall, if sodenly they were called vnto martyrdom? Be you wiser then S. Cyprian? and he writing not his priuate fashion and māner (which might be well inough corrected by greate counsell) but writing of a certain fact of a woman, which reserued the Sacrament in her chest, wherby the custome of that tyme and most vndoutedlye, the faith of that tyme may be gathered, doe you reproue the odre of the primityue church, and haue you forgotten so sone, It was no abuse in the pri­mitiue church to carie home the Sacra­ment, and receiue it alone. that old cu­stomes must preuaile? where haue you readen, in any old father, or doctor, or in any generall councell, or how can you shew it, by any treu example of the pri­mitiue church, that the carying home & reseruing of the Sacrament, was an abu­se? but let vs heare what S. Cyprian wri­teth, in his sermō de Lapsis. Cyp. ser. 5. De Lapsis. He proueth [...] [...] [Page] Wherin I confesse he did vilye and dam­nablye misvse the people and cōtrary the church. But it is to be noted, that this Marcus went about to winne vnto him selfe an estimation aboue all other prie­stes, which could not but folow, when that at his cōsecrating, the people should see the wyne turned as it were in to bloud, and that the like did not appeare, when other Priestes did consecrat. And note, that except the faith of the church in tho­se dayes, had ben, that the very bloud of Christ, was in the mysteries of the Chri­stians, he could neuer haue made any to reuerence hym the more, for that practi­se, but rather to haue brought him, before the officers of the church, and examined him, saying: We doe beleue, that we re­ceaue Christ onely by faith, which faith goeth vp to heauen, and eateth him as he sitteth at the right hand of his father: but this man sheweth vs, very plaine bloud in the chalice, which is against our belefe. And wheras this Necromanser, did tur­ne his craft to the pleasing of the peo­ple, [Page 43] and so made bloud to appeare in the chalice: it foloweth, that the whole peo­ple of the church, did reioyce in the bloud of Christ, which thei beleued to be in the mysteries, and so he craftely serued their faith an deuotion, that he might winne their praise and fauor, and that he might be pointed vnto, with, loe, there goeth a good priest, and a blessed man. But will yow heare more abuses? Som take the Sacrament for a purgation, Iuell. a­gainst slaunder: som hang it before their brestes for a protection. S. Benet (sayeth he) ministred the communion vnto a wo­man that was dead. Ergo what doth fo­low? Ergo the sacrament may be abused. I graunt it may be, as when wicked and false coniures doe make it a meane to binde the diuell, or when heretikes or in­fidells tread it vnder foote, or cast it in the fire, or pricke it with kniues to pro­ue, whether God his worde be trew, that this is his body, which was deliuered for vs. But none of your premisses almost doth inferre rightly that conclusion.

[Page] For wherby shew you, that S. Benet did abuse the Sacrament in ministring it vn­to a woman that was dead? All your ar­gument is this, Christ did not appoint, that the Sacrament shold be hanged a­bout ones necke, or put in chest, or gea­uen to dead women: ergo these be great abuses. Is this in deed good reason? that what soeuer Christ hath not expressely willed, A n [...]wgh­tye argu­ment of authoritie negatiue­lie. that may not be vsed? Sir, Christ did not bid vs, that if ther were not pre­sent three at the least, which would re­ceaue, ther should be therfore no com­munion that daye. Christ did not bid vs knele downe, and say, Lorde we doe not presume to com to this thy table trusting in our owne merites, Christ did not bid vs, when one chalice is supped vp, to fill it again out of the whole potle or quart potte. Christ did not bid vs, cary home with vs the pieces of bread, or cantells therof, and doe what we would with it. Ergo these be great abuses in the cōmu­nion boke. no Sir no, the truth must be tryed by other argumentes, then these rhetoricall repetitions and negatiues of [Page 44] Christ did not appoint this, ergo it is an abuse. especially, whereas to many doe thinke, that Christ will be content with no other thinges, but such onely as are writen: as though the holy ghost, the spi­rite of truth, were idle in the church all this while. how dare you to iudge of S. Benet his fact, the like vnto which, S. Gre­gory doth alleage for a miracle, and for a notable matter. S. Austen so wise and blessed a man, wheras he disputeth in his boke De Ciuitate Dei, of deathes which som haue vsed towardes them selues, and wheras he well remembred, that the pre­cept of God was, Exod. xx. Thou shalt not kill, & al­so remembred that the church doth ho­nor for martyrs certain, which did runne into the waters, and to kepe their virgi­nitie lost their liues, in this so doubtfull a case, wherin the church seamed to stand against God, and the precept of God, to be contraried by the holye daye of the church, he dared not rashely to conclud, but stoode herein, that the precept of God must haue his force, and with what conscience and prayse, those virgins [Page] drowned them selues, that must be left vnto the working of God the holy ghost, and not curiously serched of men. for what if they did so (sayeth he) not de­ceaued as women may be, Lib. 2. de [...]c [...]uit. Dei cap. 26. but com­maunded by God, neither [...]rring therin, but obeying? As of Sampson, it is not lawfull for vs, to thinke any other thing. And we therfore (sayeth he afterwardes) come to the conscience by hearing, but of secret thinges, we take not vpon vs the Iudgement. The doin­ges of the church and of good mē are not li­ghtlie to be iudged. Thus, Sir, it did becom you to doe, for asmuch as you confesse Sainct Benet for a Sainct, and wheras by many miracles, that hath ben well kno­wen vnto the church, not hastely to iud­ge of the spirite of God, with whom you are not so well acquainted, as Sainct Be­net was, but humbly and reuerently, to heare the miracles of God in his sainctes, and to confesse that M. Iuell doth not know all thinges. Wher you haue it, that Sainct Benet did geue the communion, vnto a dead woman, I know not verely, but Sainct Gregorye reporteth a lyke thing of hym. 2. lib. Dial. cap. 24. that a ladd of Sainct Be­net [Page 45] his monasterye, departing vnto his parentes without the blessing of Sainct Benet, and before his returne departing also the world, after he was committed to the earth, the next day he was cast vp again. Wher vpon Sainct Benet, (af­ter mone made vnto him) sent the com­munion, and willed it to be putt vpon the brest of the lad. After which do [...]e, ther was no more troble. which thing being so sadly writen by Sainct Grego­ry, we may not well lawgh at it, and the same finding no fault with the matter, lett not vs murmur against the workes and inspirations of God. In deed, it is not for euery man so to doe, but when so singular vertuous men, are moued therunto, and when a great effect doth folow, we must iudge, that God was the author therof, and that the partie did it not vpon his owne opinion and boldnes. The which answer serueth also, In oratio­ne funebri de obitu fratris sui Satyri. that we be not to bold in condemning any one his deuotion and faith, which vseth the sacrament for his defence in any kind of cause. For S. Ambrose praiseth his bro­ther [Page] Satyrus, which minding to goe ouer the seas, did take of the Christiās, which were in the shippe with him, the Sacra­ment, and hanged it about his necke.

wherevpon afterwardes, when a tempest did rise, and breake the shippe, he com­mitted him self, to the defence of Christ in hys Sacrament, and so miraculouslye escaped drowning. And lyke as Saint Pe­ter, takyng comfort and strength of the presence of Christ, Matth. 14. sayed, Lord if thou be he, bid me com vnto the, vpon the waters, and did walke vpon them, as vpon firme land: so the Catholikes, which certainly beleue, that this is he him selfe, whome they see couered vnder forme of bread, (although he be alwayes present) yet they are more out of feare, when they haue him within their handes, and reach. And throwgh the grace which cometh from him, they walke securely and pea­ceably. As contrarie wyse vnto other, which doubte of Christ his wordes, and make such a sence of them, as they be able without difficultie to attaine vnto, saying that he is present by a certain con­ceiued [Page 46] thowght of ours, and remem­braunce onely: I wondre not, if it seme foly vnto such, to make any store of the Sacrament, or to reserue it for a stay of their wauering fayth in ieoperdies. For what is bread but bread, and what can it doe more then comfort the body? But now againe, bycause in S. Benet his time, more besides him (as M. Iuell collecteth) did geue the Sacrament euen vnto dead persons: ergo they certainly did confesse a more liuely, reall, mighty, and blessed thing therin to be, then our protestantes will admitt. So that putting a side the question, whether they did well therin or no? yet this appeareth, that they toke the Sacramēt to be as Christ hath saied, his verye owne body, and that faith was in the church within the fiue or six hun­dred yeres after Christ, which M. Iuell receaueth for incorrupt. ‘ But alas, what if they, Iuell. which most of all defend the masse, them selues, find fault with the masse? as Albertus Pigghius by name, the greatest piller of that parte.’ First I answer, that the church doth not take him for the greatest [Page] piller (in so much that in three or fowre poyntes she noteth hym to haue had his errors) & a Catholike faith is not bownd vnto any priuate mans opinion. But you be accustomed to this kinde. Then I say further, that it appeareth hereby, of what good conscience Pigghius was, who did not write for fauor of his side, or hatred of the contrarye, which if he had minded, he would neuer haue yelded one inche vnto an heretike, which haue that māner of stoutnesse, that if one of them denie neuer so manifest a thing (as for exam­ple, that S. Peter was euer at Rome: vpon which thing all writers agree vpon, al­thowghe they differ somwhat in the ti­me) but, as I sayed, be the thing neuer so manifest to the contrarie of that, which any of them doth affirme or impugne, yet will the rest defend him in their wise, not perchaunce in alowing the opinion, A differēce betwene the Catholikes and Protestan­tes asser­tions. but in saing that it is a disputable questiō: and so, that being graūted, ergo say they, it is no mater of faith, whether the one part or other be taken. But the catholikes, bi­cause they be plaine, they doe vtter their [Page 47] owne opiniō, and noting dissemble with the [...]r felowes, if it be not trew. Wherin, they are suffered, so to reason one against an other, that they be both of them obediēt vnto the church, whose voice we do harkē vnto, & not what Albertus Pigghius saith. Thirdly thē I answer, that more beside Pigghius cōfesse, abuses to haue crept into the seruice of the church, as it appeareth by the catholikes, Cap de ho­ris Cano­nicis. which cōsulted vpō reformatiō of disorders, in a certain mee­ting at Ausburg. Also [...]ofmesterus in the expounding of the masse, what abu­ses are crept in to the church masse, and diuine ser­uice. demeth not, but som trifles haue ben put in. but what abuses & trifles doth he meane? forsoth, such as be in som proses, antiphonies, repeti­tiōs, and rehersalls of thinges not autēti­ke. which be in deed in the cōpasse of the masse, but are the outward garment, as it were of the body. Now, wheras you say, that Pigghius hath found out errors and abuses in the masse, it maketh a Catholi­ke man to feare by and by, lest that, either by Pigghius opiniō, Christ his body were not really present, or were not to be ado­red, & the signe of the crosse wer not to be [Page] vsed in the masse, or water and wine not to be mengled, or the bread not to be taken in the hand of the priest, when he should cōsecrat, or least som other thing worth the talking of, were omitted or abused. As for a versicle, or lesson, or som one ceremony, there may be cause per­chaūce to alter it, and yet the masse con­tinue neuer the worser. And therfor tru­ly, M. Iuell semeth vnto me, not to play a bold part and vpright. for wheras pro­perly (as he can not but know, except he be to much vnlearned) wheras I say, the masse is properly the sacrifice of the new law, what a masse is. in the which Christ his very owne body is offered, by him self throwgh the ministery of priestes, vnto God his father, for the purging, preseruing, and beuti­fying of his church: M. Iuell yet, setting him selfe to talke against the masse. I will not speake (sayeth he) of transubstantiation, A timerous bragging and vaine gloriouse weakenes of M. Iuell. of reall presence, of sacrifice, I am content to disauantage my selfe at this tyme in those thinges, but I will talke of the communion in both kindes, of the Canon of the masse, and of priuate masse. As who should say, it is [Page 48] not good to com before the face, but I shall angre them well inowgh, in tred­ding on their heeles. It is the fashion of mery men, when they are disposed to spend good tyme idlely, to find fault with the fashion of the apparel and gesture of them, whose manners they can not re­proue. And so in this place, if they haue any thing, to lay against the masse, lett them reproue, either sacrifice or presen­ce, or one of the substantiall thinges. But if they will make great bost, of defacing the masse, and in effect medle with no­thing, but the circunstances therof, truly if this be alowed, then (say I) he is no honest mans and if I be required to pro­ue it, I will bid the iudge to consider his croked nose, or halting legg. Which, as they are no good reasons, to disproue a mans honestie: so doth most of M. Iuell his talke, nothing perteine to the purpo­se. But M. Iuell craftelie perceiuing, that of congruence in speaking against the masse, it should folow, that he did speake against the sacrifice and reall presence, No (saieth he) I will not talke of them, I [Page] will disauantage my selfe which is a merue­lous kind of simplicity, to seke a praise of corage and strength in very feare and co­wardnes. This is once certaine, The sacrifice and presence disproued, all the rest would quicklye fall. but cōmunion vnder both kindes, vulgar tongue, and taking away of priuate masse (as they call it) for a while permitted: the masse in deed is neuer the worse, the communion in ef­fect is neuer the better. Yet, goe to, let vs consider, what he sayeth against the mas­se, euen in those pointes, which he hath his most aduantage in, which all (except adoration onely) if he could disproue, he is nothing the neerer of his purpose, which is to withdraw good Christians mindes from the masse, and make them hang vpon the Communion. ‘Fyrst as touching the strainge and vnknowen tongue, M. Iuell. which hath ben vsed in the masse. S. Paul his counsell in generall is, that what soeuer is done or sayed in the congregation, should so be done and sayed, that the hea­rers may haue comfort therby, and yelde thankes vnto God, and say Amen.’ It appeareth that the store is spent, when [Page 49] such argumentes are browght forth, or rather, that there was no store at all. For this obiection of the vnknowen tongue, myght haue ben vttered ouer nyght at Euensong tyde, or early at matins in the morning, which both seruices are in the latin tongue, which he termeth an vn­knowen tongue. But to kepe it vnto the masse, it is out of place and fashion. And behold, he pretendeth to talke properlye against the masse, & that he might so doe the more properly, Note how pro­perlye M. Iuel argu­eth against the Masse. and the more to the purpose, he dispatched his hādes of many other questions, and disauātaged him self, of speaking against the real presence and sacrifice, as who should say, I wyll onely medle with the masse, and yet his first obiection against it, doth serue first, a­gainst Euensong or matins, if we should folow the ordre of time. And by this rea­son also M. Iuell, you myght haue taken vpon you to speake against the Pater no­ster. Againe, this argument is good in the coūtrey, not in the towne, emong the lay vnleardned people, and not in the vni­uersitie emong scholars, vnto whom the [Page] masse is not in an vnknowen tongue.

Also this reason may be alowed, on this side of the seas, and not beyond sea, whe­re the latin tongue in many places is cō ­monly knowen. You haue proued then, that a simple Englishe man, should not alow the masse, but all Latinistes and scholars may vse the masse still. And so the great labor, which you haue taken in reciting of S. Paule, S. Austen, and Iusti­nian, is not against the masse, but against her cote onely. how think you (master myne) if I shold preach among the welsh­men, and cry out to them, that the com­munion is nawght, and should say, alas good people, you lacke the frute of our Lord his supper, and the solacing of your selues in the remembraunce of Christ his death, and so furth. And if I did bring this principal reason for me, bicause it is in a tongue vnknowen vnto them, would you not accompt me frantik, to make such a doe against the communion, for the tongue onely, in which it is writen? wold you not answer, that the cōmunion in it self is good, but this litle missehap, [Page 50] is leysurely to be amended? Euen so then geue sentence vpon your owne argu­mēt, and say, obiections against M. Iuell cōcernig his wil. that al thinges done in the church must be vnderstanded of the peo­ple. that the masse may be good for all this, but only the tongue in which it is vsed, is to be amended.

Before I goe to another obiectiō of his, I wil make som against him my self, vpon the place of S. Paule, which he trium­pheth in. For if euery thing is to be doon and saied so, in the congregation, that all may vnderstand what is sayed: wherfor is 1 all the Psaltar of Dauid, appointed to be readen in the English church, wheras all English men vnderstand not all the Psal­mes? why are ther not appointed and se­lected, certain easy and licht to be vnder­standed, but without choise, they be ta­ken, in ordre, as they folow? Then, how 2 many of the common people are there, which vnderstand not, the most easiest chapter in all Scripture? for if all this whi­le, in so great reuelation of the Ghospell, many yet doe not vnderstand the Lord his praier: how should they attaine to the Prophetes and Psalmes? Further yet, wher singing is vsed, what shall we say, to the 3 [Page] case of the people, which knele in the bo­dy of the church? yea let them harken at the chauncel dore it self, yet they shall not 4 be much the wiser. Besides this, how will you prouide, for great parishes, where a thowsand people are? and if the person haue but a small voice, is their coming to the church frutelesse? how shall they all, say Amen, which doe not all heare him? Certainly, your wisdomes must prouide, that first the minister haue a good voice. and that he haue no more to his cure and charge, then may heare him. the chaun­cell shalbe well pulled down, the church made rownd, like a Synagog of the Iues, or like a doue howse, welshmen by them selues, Cornishmen by them selues, Nor­thern men by them selues, fine Londo­ners by them selues, broder speached men by them selues. So shall all, say amen, vpon the thinges which are readen, so shall the 5 church florish. But yet, I had forgotten one principall thing, all Scripture must not be readen, nother of certen bokes all chapters. and then, for the better ler­ned of the parish, one chapter, and for [Page 51] the poorer, an other. There would be no end of confusion, if we should pro­uide, according to this deuise, that no­thing be readen in the congregation, but that which shalbe heard and vnder­stode of all, which are present. But the Apostle his purpose was of an other wi­sedom and discretion. For he, in the first vnto the Corinthians, speaking of the giftes of the holy ghost, and com­paring them together: correcteth ther­by a certain vaine glory of the Corin­thians, emong whom, some were prowd, for the gift of tongues, and thowght it a ioyly matter, to speake in a strainge language. But, sayeth the holy Apostle, 1. Cor. 14 Folow ye spirituall thinges, and rather co­uet ye, for the gift of prophecying, which was to expownd and open the Scrip­tures. And then afterwardes, he doth not dispraise the speaking with tonges, but he preferreth the gift of interpreta­tion, and of preaching the Scriptures. which is most trew in deed, as S. Paule doth proue it most manifestly by the si­militude of instrumētes and trumpettes.

[Page] For if one were neuer so cunnyng in Hebrew, Greke, and Latin, and would shew a copy of those tonges, in open ser­mon and exhortatiō: an other were mo­re worthye praise, and should bring mo­re profit vnto the hearers, which knew but his natiue tongue onely, and would preach therin vnto his cōtrie men, then he the thrise better learned man, whom none of the cumpanie could vnderstand. wherfor properly, against such vaine glo­rious men, is the meaning of Saint Paul. which seeke rather to shew theyr cun­nyng in vsing of diuers tongues, then to profitt the church of God, in expoun­ding the scriptures in that tongue which is knowen vnto the audience. But yf a parish priest say his seruice in the Latin tongue, which none of the parish besides doe vnderstand: is this priest in danger of S. Paules wordes, which he speaketh concerning the vse of a strainge langua­ge? no truly. For it is written in the same chapter of S. Paule, that he which speaketh with tōgues, speaketh not vnto men, but vnto God. 1. Cor. 14 And again, He which speaketh with [Page 52] tongues aedifieth him selfe. and again, if one doe blesse and praise God with his tongue and voice, yea although his felow be not edi­fied therby, yet he him selfe doth well in ge­uing of thankes. Which thing being so, they be to folish and scrupulous, which do admit no other prayer bokes, but such as are onely in the vulgar tongue. And wher now is this great fault? what so euer is done in the congregation (saieth M. Iuell) must be so done, as the hearers may take cō ­fort therof. And yet, say I, one may be in the congregation, and speake vnto God, and praise God in a tongue vnknowen vnto other, and be owt of blame therfor. As S. Paule sayeth, 1. Cor. 14. that he whiche spea­keth in tongues, aedifieth him selfe, and doth well to geue thankes, altowgh another be not aedified. And in the end of the forsayed chapter, if ther be not an interpretor, let him which hath knowlege in tongues, hold his peace in the church, and speake vnto him self, and vnto God. But where then is the fault? onely in this truly, if in such matters, as appertein vnto the instruction of the people, an vnknowen strange tongue be vsed. [Page] as in Sermons which are to be made vn­to them, why it is not neces­sarie the people vn­derstand all diuine seruice. and exhortations. As for mat­tins and masse, what so heinous crime is committed, if the people vnderstand not all thinges which are spoken? If the com­mons of any shere, would obteine of the Counsel of the realme, a certen benefite: and bicause it were to much, for all the whole shere to ride vp to London, if they did appoint out, half a skore of honest men, to trauell in the cōmon case, would not the matter be browght vnto a good end, except euerye plowghman should heare, what those halfe skore did say vnto the Counsell? Or if emong those halfe skore, two were chosen by consent of the rest, and those two should declare their whole mindes: were all the matter das­shed and marred, if those two m [...]ns tales were not heard of the other eight? And yet, this is but a temporall matter, and it is done by them which may err [...] and browght before them, which doe not see the hart, but iudge of the externall wor­des and deedes. And yet no vprore is made, althowgh two men declare the [Page 53] message, and take to their charge, the cause of the whole shere. How much more then, is all safe, when the people send their priest to almightye God, and mainteine him with their costes, that he should applye their sute, and speake for them diligently? Shall a Carter or a Gentleman, bicause he is best in the pa­rish, shall he com to the priest, and say, now Sir Ihon, let vs heare, what ye pray. We will vnderstand whether you say well or no, we will prompt you if you say a­misse, and you shall not deceaue vs with an vnknowen tongue? Wheras if the priest were neuer so vnlerned, neuer so vnreuerent, neuer so [...], or distracted with cares: the deuotion of the people, and their good will, is considered of God. and he for his infinite mercy, and wisedom, doth take the priest his praiers in as great and harty a sence, as any of the parish doth wish. These thinges be­ing true, is ther any hastinesse to haue all the seruice in Englishe? Doth not god consider the har [...]is, not the priest the [Page] embassadeur betwixt the people & God, Chrisost. lib. 3. de Sacerd. and the Angell or messenger of God vn­to the people? shall any more then Moy­ses goe vp to the hill to talke with God? Exod. 19. should not the rest stand at the fote of the hill trembling and quaking, lest per­chaunce, they be to malepert and draw to nigh? O what a worlde haue we? here is a fault found, that the Canon of the mas­se is not in English, which (if it were pos­sible) for the reuerence of our misteries, should be in such a kind of tongue, that none but priestes might vnderstand it, not bicause disdain is taken, that lay men should vnderstand as much as priestes do, but bicause the breaking of many arro­gant fooles hart, were to be prouided for, in barring of their curiositie. Yet, Let all thinges be doone in the congregation, say­eth M. Iuell, that they maye be vnderstan­ded of the people. yf all were reasonable men, yet for reuerence sake, many thin­ges were to be reserued from them, or rather for them. But now, som be vnclean, before whom pretious stones were not to be cast, som be sucklinges, which can not [Page 54] yet receaue hartie strong meate, other be deintye, which can not away with com­mon seruice, many moe diuersites there are to be found, and yet, as though all were one, without distinction of age, ti­me, or person, it is not well, except all thinges be doon in a common tongue.

But how is that proued? Mary bicause S. Paule saieth, that he had rather speake fi­ue wordes, that other may be instructed therby: then ten thowsand in a strange an vnknowen tongue. Truth it is, and yet S. Paule speaketh not of all seruice of the church, but of that part onely, which apperteineth vnto the instruction of o­ther, in which the strainge tongue is not alowed. For if the speaking in tongues (according to S. Paule) is to be vnder­standed of daily seruice and praier, 1. Cor. 14. why doth he appoint two or three at the most to speake in tonges and one to interpret and expound them, wheras daily seruice is and may be well done of more then two or three skore? Again by their inter­pretation of speaking in tongues, all ser­uice must be in the mother tongue, and [Page] women thereat may sing. But S. Paule doth so take speaking with tongues, that he sayeth, let women hold their tongues in the church. One thing they might say with good reason, that the Epistle and Ghospell, which are appointed for the instruction of the people, might be readen in the mother tongue, if they were first well translated. And yet also, euen by Sainct Paule, if the priest were able to expound it afterwardes, he might read it in the masse time, in an vnknowen tongue, to the common people. For S. Paule doth not forbid to speake with tongues, so that one be present which can expound them. Ergo say they, when none doth expounde it, ther is a great fault committed. Goe to, let me graunt, that all is not so exact, but that heretikes may peeke a quarell. Who shall amend that, which is not well? or who hath made you controllers in the howse of God? why doe ye not first, make a priuy expo­sition of your conceit vnto the officers? why doe ye not then, cast your heades to­gether, and make a most humble suppli­cation? [Page 55] why goe not you to Rome, and confer with Peters successor, as Paule a [...]ended to Ierusalem to Peter, and the rest? Why doe ye not pray to God, that he will helpe, when no peaceable request can obteine? And if God, for som cause knowen to him self, should differ his help, must you take the sword into your han­des, or vsurp the auctoritye of Christ his church, and make your selues leutenants vnder God? And yet, it is no greater fault, to read the Ghospell in Latin vn­to English men, then to read the same in English vnto Welshmen. But you will prouide hereafter, that Welshmen may haue i [...] in the mother tongue, or cause them to learne English. How say you then to Irishe men, Northen men, and Cornishmen? Ther is no remedie, but euery spech, must haue a boke of ser­uice, in ther proper mother tongue.

But yet, in the meane time, doe tho­se quarters, which obey the Kinges of England, and vnderstand not the En­glishe tongue, lacke the frute of their deuotion, whiles they be at seruice? [Page] And shall we make folish cōplaintes, and exclamations, that the poore welshmen doe lacke the liuely worde of God, that S. Paules will is broken, that the order of the primitiue church is neglected, and so furth, as far as our rhetorike will ser­ue vs, bycause they vnderstand not what the priest sayeth? Let it be an abuse, that the people three yeres sence, did not vn­derstand the Ghospell, but onely stode vp at it, and bowed their knee at the na­me of Ihesus, and did conceaue wonder­full high thinges to be vnderneth the La­tin spech, and honored God in their har­tes. How much better is it now, Inconue­niences by hauing di­uine seruice in En­glish. I pray you, when the simple folke, and those which are of the old making, vnderstand the sentences but by halfes, and either for lacke of attention, or dulnes of hea­ring, or smalnes of voice in the reader, doe beare very litle away: and when tho­se of the new making, doe herken to mainteine talke there vpon, or to appose the priest, or to iudge the priest, or con­demne the church of God, or to glorye in their knowledge, deceauing them sel­ues [Page 56] and wening, that they be able to ex­pounde the Scriptures, which are not able for lack of humilitye, to heare them onely, as yet. Charitie without science, is more to be alowed, then science, by which charitie is greatly confounded.

Yet for all this, the Canon of the masse owght to be secret let the epistle and the Ghospell, be in the mother tongue, what hath M. Iuell to doe with the Canon, In which, the priest doth, (as Sainct Chri­sostom sayeth) stand before God, Chrisost. lib. 6. de Sac [...]rd. as a su­ter for all the whole worlde. For whom, the people should pray, that his seruice for them, might be acceptable, and that he may haue good successe? What, if they vnderstand not his spech all that while? The quire, according to the La­tine and Greke church, is occupied in singing the angelicall hymne of Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus. Whiles the priest, pray­eth softly and closely at the altar, the laitye were to be taught, what is the peoples of­fice at the masse tyme to loke for the consecrating of that body, which was borne, circumcided, presented, with fast debated, scorged, torne, cruci [...]ied, raised vp, and which at lenghth ascended into [Page] heauen for their sakes. And that presence of Christ once beleued, they shold nede no English tongue, or sermon, for that tyme, to bring hym vnto theyr remem­braunce, whom presentlye they know by the infallyble fayth of the church, to be vpon the altar. What nedeth then any English at this point? yf one might speak with tongues of men and Angells: yet at the presence of those mysteries, al ton­gues are to like.

And therfore good men forsake theyr tongues, and goe to their hart, and there speake they after a more excellent sort, then Latinistes, Grecians, or Hebricians can doe. Which spech of hart, (which soundeth in the eares of God almighty) good people had most of all, when they were lest busied, with the spech of bo­dely tongues: with which, they vttered mysteries, and thankes, and vowes, and loues, and complaintes, and requestes, and all heauenly desi [...]es, and deuotions.

Out of the pulpet, they lerned theyr fayth [...] out of the church, they talked of [Page 57] God: in the chauncell, they appointed priestes and clerkes to prayse God, and to pray for them. at the altar, there stode the priest alone, and there was theyr Sa­uior and ours, ready for them, And after this sort, seruice being appointed, there remained for them, consideration of the thinges, which were by externall signes declared. The true religion consisteth not in tongues, which tongues are ne­cessarye for learning of the faith, but faith ones receaued and taken in the hart: the most perfect way afterwards, of seruing God, is, to consider in our mindes, the greatnes of his benefites, which we com­prehend by faith. And by this reason one plaine picture of the passion of Christ, shall gene more deuotiō, vnto him which alredy is faythfull, Pictures are neces­sarie for the fayth­full people then a most eloquent learned sermon of M. Iuell him selfe. Bi­cause, the end of the sermon, is, to leaue in my hart, and mind, a picture of Christ, and the beginning of a picture, is, the Image of that, which I haue printed in my conceuing. so that I may say, where a [Page] preacher endeth, there beginneth a pain­ter, and hearing of sermons, is for those which are to be instructed, and beholdin­ges of externall signes and pictures, is for them, which loue in silence and close­nes, to practise their beleife. Wherfor, ther is no cause to haue the Canon of the masse in Englishe: but cause ther is, why the lay people should be instructed, what to think, in time of the Canon. And, a­gain I say, it is no greate matter, to hea­re what is therin saied, but the only mat­ter is, to beleue, that which therin is do­ne. And, as at the beginning it was neces­sarye, to open my eares, that the worde of God might entre by that way into my hart: so the worde ones by faith concei­ued, and the hart being now (throwgh the goodnes of the holy ghost) made as it were great with childe there with all, I shall more euidently, behold the veritie of God, in those mysteries (of which it is sayed, This is my body) if eares, and eyes, and all sense, were stopped: then, if I should entend the proper actions of those senses. ‘ [Page 58] But S. Austen saieth, in the praiers, M. Iuell. which we make vnto God, we must not chirpe like birdes, but sing like men. ergo we must not vse an vnknowen tongue.’ Yea, with a further ergo, we must lerne to vnderstand the English, which we read in the congregation, which bicause thou­sandes doe not receaue, therfor they be chirpers and not speakers. Yet the En­glishe seruice doth remaine, although e­uery one doth not vnderstand it.

Iustinian also a Christian Emperor, M. Iuell. made a strait constitution, that the wordes of the mi­nistration, should be pronounced with open voice, that the people might say Amen. ergo the seruice must be in English. yet for al that we say Amen, vpon those wordes, which we vnderstand not, when ther is no mi­strust in the faith and honesty of the per­son which pronounceth them. And also, if the people saied Amen, to the wordes of the ministration, which I think (to speake more plainly) are the wordes of consecration, then doth it appeare, that they confessed the wordes, which the priest did speake, to be most true in them [Page] selues. so that, when the priest pronoun­ced these wordes, This is my bodye, the answering of Amen by the people, did confirm it to be so in deed, and exclu­deth quite all siguration and significati­on of his bodye. Touching the second abuse of the cōmunion, he findeth fault, that the Sacrament is not receaued in both kindes: of which afterward we shall speke seperatly. And in the meane tyme this I say, that this obiection maketh no more against the masse, then if I should disproue a good dish of meate, not for any vnsa [...]orines therin, but bicause the good wife of the house, for diuers causes doth kepe it away from the seruantes.

For what is this against the masse, that both kindes be not ministred, in the which masse both kindes are consecra­ted, and both kindes may be receaued, if the masters of the house, doe thinke it good? Were the law of M [...]s, or the. Ghospell of Christ, worthely to be re­proued, bicause a few onely were suffred, to read the law and Ghospell? doth the Sonne lese any of his light, bicause the [Page 59] cloudes com betwixt our sight and him, and kepe his beames away from vs? Sup­pose then, that it were most true (which is most false) that the Bishopes and hea­des of the church, did robbe the people of one part of the sacramēt, shall this rob­bery be obiected against the masse it self, in which both kindes are consecrated? I graunt vnto yow, M. Iuell, that the sa­crament hath been receaued, and may be receaued hereafter in both kindes, what doe you conclude thervpon? ergo there is an abuse in the masse. Why Sir, doth the order of the masse forbed the recea­uing o [...]der both kindes? are not both kindes consecrated in the masse? doe not the priestes receaue both? Yea, but the Bishopes and priestes deliuer vnto the lay people one kind onely. They doe it in deede, and for iust cawses. But a Bi­shopp, or priest, is not a masse, and the fault of men is not the fault of the serui­ce. The fault of men is not the fault of the seruice of God. Reproue then the Bishopes, and spea­ke not against the masse. and confesse, that the masse is autentike, and godly. [Page] but that the ministers do not folow their boke, which I say not, as thowgh the Bi­shoppes and priestes were in deed giltie, theyr doinges being grownded vppon most iust causes: but to shew, that if the­re were any fault, it is yet more rhetorike then reason, to obiect that agaynst the masse, which apperteyneth onlye vnto the men. ‘The third point, that I promised to speake of, M. Iuell. is the Canon, a thing for many causes very vain in it selfe, and so vncertain, that no man can redely tell, on whom to father it.’ Loe, what a fault here is, no man can tell who made the Canon of the masse, ergo it is not to be credited. As who might doubt, whethere the third and fowerth bokes of the kinges were to be credited, the proper author of them being vn­knowen, or as thowgh they were fautles which haue denied S. Ihons reuelations, and S. Paule to the Hebrewes, bycause it hath been a question, whether they were the true authors of those thinges. After like māner of folly it is saied, no man can redely tell, what yere of Nero his raigne, [Page 60] S. Peter did come to Rome, ergo he was neuer at Rome. which liberty of babling ones graunted, there may be found which shall make this quareling argument: and say, the histories doe not agree, what yea­re of his age Christ suffered, ergo his pas­sion is not to be beleued. wel yet, among all them which are named authors of the Canon, take him which was farthest of from Christ, and see, what a foule blank M. Iuells cause must haue. Innocentius tertius saieth, that it cam from the Apost­les, The Canō of the mas­se came frō the Apost­les. that is to high, thinketh M. Iuell. Goe to then, take him which cometh lower. that is S. Gregory the first. who lyuing within six hundred yeares after Christ, it foloweth well, that the Canon of the masse, is of great antiquitie. And now bi­cause you glory, that for six hundred yea­res after Christ, there can be found no­thing, against your communion and reli­gion, it is easy to nombre, that the very Canon of the Masse, M. Iuell cō futed by his owne report. which you speake most against, was in those dayes vsed in the church of Christ. Wherfor if the A­postles made not the Canon them selues, [Page] yet are you cōfounded, bicause they ma­de it, which liued within six hundred yere after Christ, by which yeres, you are con­tented to be iudged. But you wil say, that some write, how Gregorius the third, made the Canon, and that you beleue, that to be most true. In deed it is the property of your side to take all thinges at the worst▪ for otherwise, why should you not beleue rather, that one Schola­sticus made it before S. Grego [...]e his ty­me, as you vnderstand hym, and other also before you, no euill men or prote­stantes. Althowgh in deede it is worth the cōsidering, whether he meaned, some one certaine lerned man, whose name should be Scholasticus, or els some of the Apostles and scholars of Christ. Gregor. li. 7. epi. 63 for his wordes be these in his epistle and answer, made in the defence of the order of the masse of his church, where cōcerning owr Lordes prayer, why it is readen after the Canon, It seemeth vnto me an vnseemelie thing, (sayth he) that we shold saie ouer the oblation, the praier which Scholasticus, (or [...]ls as I wold translate it) which the scholar [Page 61] made, and should not saye ouer the bodye and bloud of owr Sauior the verie tradition (meaninge the Pater noster) which he hym selfe dyd make. But how so eue [...] it be, he which reporteth that Grego­rius tertius made the Canon, might well inowgh write so, according to his know­ledge, and when it is writen by S. Gre­gory, that one Scholasticus, or a disciple of Christs, was the auctor therof, this is nothīg falsified by him, which wrot after­wardes. And likewise it may stand, that it cam from the Apostles, as Innocētius ter­tius writeth, for all that an other saieth, that it cam from Gregorius. except per­chaunce yow will say, that one may not read more then an other, an one see fur­ther then an other, bothe speaking accor­ding to their knowledge & euidēces. But whosoeuer were the first deuiser of it, it forceth not. sayeth M. Iuell. Yes mary Sir, for this being proued by more auctorites of wri­ters, that the Canon did come from the Apostles, or that it was extāt within. vjC. yeares after Christ, thē it can be disproued to be of so great antiquity, great sham it is [Page] for vs, not to mainteine so auncient an order of the masse, and great forgetful­nes in you, M. Iuell, to iest at that, which is found to haue ben receaued, within the compasse of six hundred yeres after Christ, Note the vncertain­tie of M. Iuels mynd where to find it. of which yeres you make your sel­fe so sure, that for so long space you say, all went with you without exceptiō. But now, if it forceth not who made the Ca­non (wheras before you made the matter so great, that it was against the scriptu­res, bicause of S. Paule, which saieth, Sciocui credidi, I know whō I haue beleiued, as though Catolikes had not a church to beloue, but should hang vpon the report of historiographers) well seing then now, it forceth not who made the Canon, what fault haue you found in the substā ­ce and meaning of the Canon?

First you make a shamefull he, that the priest desireth God to blesse Christ his bodye. Beare it well awaye, I pray you, and remember it that I charge you, with [Page 62] makyng of an open lie, euen at your first begynning which you make agaynst the Canon. It is not I saye, in owr Latin and common Canon, that the priest desireth God the Father, to blesse Christ his bo­dye. And I dare sweare for it, althowgh you may do much in Sarum, that no mis­sall after the vse of Sarum, hath the lyke as you doe speake in the begynning of the Canon. Also if it should be saied, so, as you report, in any part of the whole Canon, can you proue that the Catho­likes haue prayed so, for this cause, as thowgh Christ his bodye were not suffi­cientlie blessed alreadi [...]? What a Ioan­nes diuisar be you, to make so wicked and vyle dis [...]urses, vpon that which either is not sayed at all, or hath ben spoken with much reuerence, and great humilitie of the parties. In deed, such lyke wordes, ha­ue ben vsed of the Grecians, Vide Bes­sanionem Card. de sacr. [...]uch. euen after the consecration perfected, as appeareth by their wrytinges. But what cause allea­ge they for it? Marie, thos [...], (say they) which are in great desire of any thing, vse to speake of that which is most sure, [Page] as thowgh they were not sure of it, no­thing thereby mistrusting the effect, but declaring the vehemencie, of theyr desi­re. As the Prophete Dauyd, when he had sayd: Psal. 4. God my ryghtuousnes hearde me when I called vnto hym, yet in the sa­me verye Psalme and verse folowing, he addeth, Haue mercye vppon me O Lord, and heare my prayer. Theodori­tus in hunc Psalm. 4. Loe sayeth Theo­doritus, The iust man is not satisfied in prayer, but making his petitions, and obtey­ning them, yet continueth [...]e styll in prayer. by which yow see, how farr a Christian and good commentator would be, from such deuyses, as yow M. Iuell doe make vpon holye sayinges. But the Latin Ca­non, hath no such wordes at all. neyther before nor it after consecration, that (I meane) God shoulde blesse Christ his bodye. In the beginnyng of the Canon the priest desireth God, to accept and blesse those giftes, and presentes, and sa­crifices, or oblations of bread and wy­ne, which may receiue encrease of san­ctification, and are in deede made most holy [...], when they are turned in to the [Page 63] bodye and bloud of Christ. Also, after consecration, the priest desireth God, to loke me [...]cifullie downe, vpon those pre­tiouse thinges, which are there present. But how? not as they are in them selues mos [...] acceptable, but as they are offered. for who can saye, that his hart is chast and pure? and who knoweth, whether God wil not punishe vs, when we are not prepared rightlie, to do that office. Con­sidering therfor, the holines of God, and vilenes of man, the church desireth God, to accept owr offering of Christ [...] bodie, owr Lord▪ or (in other wordes to saye it) to accept that bodye and those giftes of­fered. But of that place M. Iuell speaketh afterward. I conclud therefore vpon his present wordes, that he maketh an open lie and mani [...]est. And if hymselfe was not the maker of it, lett hym tell, of what au­thor he borowed it. ‘Further the priest saieth, M. Iuell. that he offereth and presenteth vp Christ vnto his father.’ True it is, and that you may wonder the more, not the priest onely, but all the whole church doth offer Christ daily to [Page] his father. For as concerning the priest, either t [...]ere is no priest among vs at all, or we be no sinners, or we must haue a daily sacrifice, to make our God fauorable vn­to vs. A sac [...]ifice, not of thankes geuing onelye, which the law of nature teacheth vs to offer to our cheif Lord and Crea­tor, neither of calfes and shepe, as the old law did appoint it, but a sacrifice propor­tionable to a new law, and a sacrifice worthy and meete for a new testamēt, of Ihesus Christ. What say you then, good Sir, if the priest of the new law and te­stament offereth Christ vnto his father? it is, say you, open blasphemy. So say they, which worship false Godes, which they haue made to them selues, by licentious vnderstanding of the Scriptures, and by cutting, hewing and pecing together of the veritie. For wherin consisteth this blasphemye? doe you, which are of the church by outward shew of your degree, and māner of behauiour, think priesthod to be a pelting base office, as the worldly people doe? But Chrisostom saieth, Libr. 3. de Sacerd [...]ti [...] That priesthod so far passeth kingdom, as the soule [Page 64] passeth the body: and we ought to reuerence priestes, not only more then kinges, and prin­ces, but to set them forth with more honor then our owne fathers. Or think you, that Christ in his last supper, did not of [...]er vp him selfe to his father? But the Prophet saieth, yea rather God, not onely saieth it, but bindeth it with an othe, and it shall not repent him therof, Psal. [...]09. that Christ is a priest for euer, according to the order of Melchisedech. Can you saye for all this, Priestes do [...] [...]er Christ. that priestes haue no authority to offer him? But Chrisostom replieth saying, The holy oblation whether Peter or Paule doe offer it or any other priest, In moral. Ho [...]l. 2. in. 1. cap. 2. epist. ad Timot. of what so euer goodnes he be, is the same, which Christ did geue, vnto his disciples, and which priestes euen now to these daies, doe consecrate. Cap. 10. ad Hebr. And S. Ambrose, He is (saieth he) our Bishop, which offered the sacrifice, which purged vs, the same we also now offer vp, which then being offered, can not be consumed. Wherfore, seing that priestes, how so euer they be in their li­ues, are honorable for the sacrifice which they offer: And wheras Christ did offer vp him selfe, according to the order of [Page] Melchisedech in his last supper: and third­ly wheras priestes do the same very thing which our master did before, it is ignorāce not to know these thinges, or dissimula­tiō to passe by them, it is impiety to speak against the church, and it is blasphemy in deed to reuile or taunt at Christ his bodi. But yet M. Iuel M. Iuell. wil proue his saing. For contrariwise, Christ presenteth vs, and ma­keth vs a swete oblation, in the sight of God his father. Ergo (sayeth he) the priest offereth not Christ. which is open blas­phemye, or els he should say, that he vn­derstandeth not the matter. For what contrariety is betwen Christ, See what a reason M. Iuell brin­geth. and his church, or betwen the head and the bo­dy? All this which I shal say, is true. Christ offereth vp vs, Christ is the oblation it selfe, the churche offereth Christ, and Christ doth offer his church, and in all this, ther is no contrarietie, witnes hereof is S. Austen saing, Cap. 20. lib. 10. de ciuit. Dei Bicause of the forme of a seruant which he [...]oke, Christ is also a priest, him self being the offerer, and him self the oblation. Of which thing, he would the daily sacrifice of the church to be a Sa­crament. [Page 65] wheras he is the head of her the body, and she the body of him the head, she aswel being accustomed to be offered by him, as he accustomed to be offered by her. So that euery man may see, whith what ler­ning, and truth the Canon hitherto hath ben reproued. But let vs cōsider the rest. ‘More ouer, M. Iuell. the priest desireth God to accept the body of his so [...]ne Ihesus Christ▪ as he once accepted the sacrifice of Abell, or the oblatiō of Melchisedech. And think we, that Christ the soune of God standeth so far in his fa­thers displeasure, that he nedeth a mortal and miserable man, to be his spokes man, to pro­cure him fauor?’ Haue you seen a man somtimes, for wan­tones, or dronkenes, or plaine [...], to fight against his owne shadow. [...] M. Iuel here, streketh that kind of men which I haue not read of. and none, I think, which beleueth in Christ, did euer drea­me, that his father was angry with him, and that he needeth to haue, not onely a mortal miserable man, but any most glo­rious creature to speake for him. Yet this preacher so sowndeth, as though all the whole number of Catholikes, which these nine hūdred yeres (by his owne cō ­fession) [Page] vsed the Canon, haue praied to God, for Christ his soule. Now, God ha­ue mercy on his sowle, which so loudly belieth, so many blessed and lerned men. This obiection hath in part been answe­red before, yet I say now again, that the church desireth God to loke downe v­pon his sonnes body, and to accept it, either for vehemency of loue and deuo­tion, 1 which causeth men to repete again and again, that which they are sure of, or 2 els, bicause all flesh is weake and vnclean, and vnworthy to come so nigh vnto the most high mysteries, therfore, the church desireth, that God will accept at her han­des, and looke fauorably vpon the body of his so [...]ne, fearing lest perchaunce the wickednes of her be such, that God tur­neth away his face from her, euen at that time, when his most dearest soune is pre­sent. After which manner, (albeit the Ghospell and the actes of Christ, be al­waies liked of God) yet of som, it is saied by the Prophet, Psal. 49. VVy doest thou declare my righteousnes, and takest my testament in thy mouth? Which men, wel might praye, af­ter [Page 66] this sort, which M. Iuel so gretly won­dreth at, and say, Lord behold with a mer­ciful coūtenance the wordes of thy owne Ghospell, and turne not away they face from thy owne testamēt. And so likewise that which foloweth in the Canon, that God wold accept the sacrifice of his son­nes bodye, as he accepted Abell, Abra­ham, or Melchisedechs oblations, it is not spoken, as M. Iuel faineth, as thowgh the bodye of Christ were to be receaued, no otherwise, then shepe or lambe, and bread or wine, but the church, declareth therin her wish, that, as concerning her seruice, not as concerning the price of the thinges, offered in the old time and these daies of grace, it wold please God, to receaue at her handes, the sacrifice of Christ his body, so thankfully, as he re­ceaued the oblations of those good fa­thers, And that her seruice in this part, may be no worse vnto her, Iuell play­eth the Ethny [...]es part then those of old time were to Abell, Abraham, and Melchisedech. But let vs now cōsider by this obiection, what one may do, which is disposed, and what euil example is geuen [Page] vnto Ethnikes by the lokes of Christi­ans, to speake against the Christian faith. Arise o Lord, Psal. 43. (sayeth the Prophet) why doest then slepe. Remembre Dauid, o Lord, Psal. 131. (sayeth the same Prophet) and all his gentlenes. and that Dauid is Christ.

And in an other place of the Psalmes, it is writen, Psal. 77. that God did arise like one which had ben a slepe, and like a valiant which had well dronk of wine. Yea it ys expresslie sayed for Christ, Psal. 19. I pray God to heare the, in the tyme of thy tribulation. and so furth thorowgh the whole Psalme. Shall Chri­stians in these places, play the Ethnikes partes, and aske, whether God be a slepe or forgetfull, or well tipled? what doe they meane, which pray to obteine any thing, for Christ his sake? do they not say in effect all this, behold, o Lord, how thy blessed soun take flesh vpon hym for our sakes, remembre his obediēce, remembre the scourges, the prickes of thorne, the nailes, the crosse, the death which he suf­fered, remembre and doe not forget? how deepe is S. Bernard, and S. Bonauentura, and thousandes of blessed men, in the cōsideratiōs [Page 67] of our Sauior his passion? what lamentations? what questions? what wis­shes? what thoughtes haue they? in cōsecratione cer [...]i Paschalis. O bles­sed fault, sayeth S. Gregory, which deserued such a redemer. what saye we, to the aun­cient hymnes of the church, which are song in the lent? the sense I remembr [...] although I keepe not all the wordes,

what place is left for the fong of the three children, All the workes of our Lord blesse our Lord? Psal. 148. And the Psal. Praise ye our Lord, which is in the heauens. in which Psalmes, sonne and moon, thunder, lightning, hai­le, snow, hills, fildes, riuers, seas, all beastes of the earth, all foules of the aire, and (to be short) all creatures are called vpon, to praise God? may you, wisely now, obiect and say, the moone can not heare me, the wild beastes be neuer the soner obedient for me, the birdes will sing no louder for all me, with princes of the earth what is ther to doe for me? yong m [...]n, and virgins, [Page] old men with younglinges let them praise the name of our Lord, and who made me an of­ficer to commaund so many? I will goe no further, but breifly, will I conclude, there was neuer kind of argument more pernicious, How per­nicious it is, godlye mens deuotions to be examined and iudged by world­linges. then this one: to examine the deuotions and praiers of good men, by the rules of worldly ciuilitye, and to iest at the homlines and hartines of Catho­likes, when they speake to God, as one frind would vnto an other familiarly, or whē they speake, according to the world, childishely, or according to the nature of thinges, absurdly, Off all which poyntes yow may fynd examples in the boke of Cantica Canticorum, if euer yow haue either reade them, or can with al your wit vnderstand them, and then to bring tho­se sayinges before the people, to be iud­ges therof, which haue no tast almost of heauenly thinges, it is most vaine and vn­reasonable.

[Page 68] It is besides the person of him, which hath ben brought vp among lerned men, and for opinion of learning and graui­ty, is called a Bishop, so to dissemble, and so to counterfaict the vice, in making of sporte, with a fable of his owne. And first the Canon, is not truely Englished in this parte which he iesteth at. For the wordes of the Latin Canō be these, M. Iuells false re­porting. Iube haec per­ferri, per manus Sancti Angeli tui, in sub­lime altare tuum. which is to say, cōmaund o Lord these thinges to be brought, by the handes of thy holy Angell, in to thy high al­tar. Yet M. Iuell to make more sport, en­glisheth perferri, to be caried away, not to be brought or caried vp, as the truth is. And bicause the Canon maketh men­tion of the Angells handes, he fableth, as though Christ should be caried vpō an Angells back, or shoulders, or as though the Catholike did meane, that Christ should be borne vpon an Angels backe, and caried vp away into heuen. But what a fable is this, sayeth he? for soth a very folish grosse fable in deed, inuented by the diuell, and vttered by Melhoserus, and [Page] translated in to english by M. Iuell. A fo­lish grosse fable I say, bicause the church of God hath no such carnall base, vnder­standing of the place. But desireth God, that by the ministery of Angells, which wait vpon vs and his misteries, he would commaund the body of his soune our Lord, to be caried vp, not according to the changeing of place, but according to his gracious acceptation of our seruice, in to his high altar, which is heauen.

For, thinketh M. Iuell, that when the Angells doe cary vp, good mens almes deades, or their praiers, or fastinges, or teares, or any such like, in to the sight of God, that they make those thinges vp in fardels, and cast them vpon their backes, and make hast to heauē warde, and there vndoe their packes? Of spiri­tuall thin­ges man must speak and think spiritually for the worde of ca­rying vp, soundeth in the eares of a carnall man, as though there were changeing of place ther about, or heuines of a burden, or vse of armes, sholders, or back, or some stay vpon which the cariage might rest. which members are not in Angels, and yet the scripture speaketh, after the fashion [Page 69] of men, testifying our almes dedes, fa­stinges and prayers, to be caried vp, be­fore the face of God in heauen, and pre­sented before his maiesty, by the mini­stery of Angells. now if one did not vn­derstand the sense of those wordes right­ly, it were wisedom for him, to hold his peace, rather then to vtter his grossenes, in vnderstanding them so basely and fo­lishelye. Especiallye, wheras Sainct Am­brose, so blessed and lerned a doctor, hath like wordes vnto these, which M. Iuell contemneth, saing in his boke, which he made of the sacramentes: Lib. 4. de Sac. cap. 6. VVe besech the, and pray the, that thou wilt receaue this ob­lation, vp to they high altar, by the handes of thy Angells, as thou hast vouchsafed to receaue the giftes of thy iust seruant A­bell, and the sacrifice of our patriarch Abra­ham, and that which the high priest Mel­chisedech offered vp vnto the. Loe Sir, if it please you, to shew the finenes of your witt, you may find fault with Sainct Ambrose, and aske of your audience, more folish then your selfe. what a tale is this, that the oblation of the church, [Page] should be borne vpon an Angell (on pick packe perchaunce) and so caried vp away, into heauen? but see the good nature of the man? he confesseth his folies, and saieth, he would not stand so long vpon them, if force draue him not ther vnto.

But what force trow ye? The Pro­testantes preach to please ther audience. I think (bicause a wanton audience is most delited with iesting against other, and bicause a grosse audience, conceiueth thinges spoken af­ter a carnall sort, and thinketh that prea­cher which so doth, to be a very [...]) that, to serue his audience, he could not leaue of, so plausible a matter. Therfore saieth he (after he had done his worst) I leaue to speake farther of the Canon, M. Iuell. geuing you occasion by these few thinges, the better to iudge of the rest. Which wordes I note, bicause in deed as the whole Canō might haue ben mistrusted, if any certain faultes had been noted in it: so when with all his power and cunning, he hath spoken the worst, and yet hath reproued no­thing, but his owne misunderstanding, an imagination, which he fained to be in the Canon, therfor we may iudge all [Page 70] well of the rest, when no euill is found in those pointes, which he toke to be far­thest from the best. ‘The [...]owerth matter that remayneth to be tow [...]hed, M. Iuell. is, the adoration.’ It is agreable withe the rest of their do­ctrine, and it foloweth cōsequentlye, that no bodye of Christ being in the Sacra­ment, there should be no adoration vsed at all. So that the very sure way to dis­proue adoration, were, to disproue the reall presence. Which bycause they can not doe, against so manifest wordes of our Sauior, therefor how so euer the mat­ter of the presence doth stand, yet will they assaye to take away the worshipping or adoring of Christ in the Sacrament. But that is done with so light and vnfytt argumētes, that they may serue, by chan­geing of a few wordes, against all kynd of orders in the church, and consequent­lye of owr fayth. For what is it that you say, good master myne against adoratiō? Christ (sayeth he) which knew best what owght to be done, M. Iuell. when he ordeyned and de­liuered the Sacramēt of hys body and bloud, [Page] gaue no cōmaundement that any man should fall downe to it, and worshipp it. Ergo, yowr argumēt is this, The Pro­testantes condemne all volun­tar [...]e seruice of God. that what so euer is not cō maunded to be done, is to be left vndone. And where then are all customes which yow haue set so much by, as it appeereth by the fyrst side before yowr Sermō? Also where is it in all Scripture, that Christ cō ­maūded his Apostles to fawle downe and worship hym, hym selfe? The Magians, S. Peter as he was in the bote together with Christ, Matth. 2. Matth. 14. Matth. 20. Matth. 15. 10. 9. the mother of S. Iohn and S. Ia­mes, the straynge woman the Syrophae­nissa, the blind man, whō Christ healed by tempering of his spettle and earth toge­ther, Luc. 24. the Apostles after the resurrection: all these fell downe and worshipped Christ. but where read we, that he commaunded them so to do? Is there no voluntarye ser­uice of God, but that al must be obtained by way of cōmaundemēt? It was inowgh (I trowe) that he said to his disciples, An argu­ment of authoritie negatiuely ys na [...]ght and prote­stantlyke. take, eate, this is my body, which shall be deliuered for you. For to doubte thereof, whether Christ his body were to be honored, it was for them whiche doubted, whether [Page 71] he were Christ or no. Christ dyd byd his Apostles to take and eate, but he dyd not expressely cōmaund them, to open their mouthes, to soften the meate in the mou­the, to lett it downe in to the stomake. for what need was there so to do, wher­as he, which lycenseth me to eate, lycen­seth me also to vse all those meanes, by which eatyng is performed. So in lyke manner, owr Sauyor sayd, This is my bo­dye, and this being receiued and beleued of Christians, to what purpose was it to say, Aryse Sirs, and fall downe before yowr God. or to say, Adore me in yowr hart. When the kyng doth shewe hym selfe in his robes and croune, or when he woulde in the dark, vtter hym selfe by speakyng vnto the lordes of the court, is it to be required, that he must saye pre­cisely, putt of yowr cappes vnto me, and bowe downe yowr knees, or ells doth not euerye obedyent hart straytewayes gea­ue all reuerence dew vnto hys prince, withowt further warning. By lyke reason then, the kyng almighty hath spoken the worde, Thys ys my bodye, by which [Page] worde, they which are accustomed vnto his voyce, are as sure of his presence, as if they should see hym visiblie, and shall we, if we are of the king his court, re­quyre yet to here and see more in this ca­se, and may we wonder at others folyes, which make lowe courtesie, where as they had no commaundement? And yet, M. Iuell, is so delited, in this kynde of argu­ment, which procedeth by negatiues, that he goeth fu [...]ther therein, and sayeth, S. M. Iuell Paule toke the Sacrament at Christ his han­des, and as he had taken it, he deliuered it to the Corinthians, and neuer willed adoratiō, or Godlie honor to be done vnto it. To which I answer, with askyng this question, whe­ther S. Paule commaunded vs to stand or kneele, to lye a long at the communion, or sytt doune? Trulye of these thinges there is no worde or commaundement, what then? may any man tumble at the communion, or leane vpon his breast or vpon one of his elbowes, or doe what please hym, bicause nothing is appointed by S. Paule, as concernyng adoration?

The English cōmunicantes them selues, [Page 72] doe vse to kneele (except perchaunse in some very stiff harted men, there be no kneeling at all, bicause they stand in their owne conce [...]tes) But Christ and S. Pau­le commaunded not kneeling, and yet Christ knew best what he had to doe, and S. Paule delyuered that which he re­ceiued of Christ. what strength then hath this kynd of argument, to saye, Christ or S. Paule commaunded not these thinges, The Pro­testantes argumēt. ergo they are not to be kept or beleued at all?

Truly it hath so litle against the Catho­lykes, that the argumēt is flatlye denyed. So greate for all that, against the prote­stantes: that it shameth all the order of theire communion, as concernyng appa­rell, place, standing, kneeling, confessyng, thankes geuing, and such lyke. Which all, I doe not say or think, to be repugnant with Scripture, but I say, that as concer­ning the order which there is vsed, there ys no commaundement in Scripture, and no comm [...]undement being in Scripture of it, ther is no iust cause or reason, wher­for it should be regarded. Such is the protestantes logyk. Well, if this argumēt [Page] which runneth by negatyues, had been good, the authorytie and name of Christ or Sainct Paule in that behalfe had been sufficient: but now it ys most weake and simple, and not worth the bringing, and yet M. Iuell will be copious in it, saying: The old Doctors, and holye fathers of the Church, M. Iuell. Sainct Cyprian, Sainct Chrysosto­me, Sainct Ambrose, Sainct Hierome, Sainct Augustyn, and others that receiued the Sa­crament at the Apostles handes, and, as it may be thowght, contynued the same in such sort as they had receiued it: neuer make men­tion in any of all their bokes, of adoring or worshipping the Sacrament. ergo &c.

This ys a nowghtye lying argument. Nawghtye, by cause, if in all their wor­kes, they neuer doe speake of adoring the Sacrament, that doth not disproue the adoration, which Christians haue euer vsed. And lying, bycause in deed, they ma­ke mention in their workes, of adora­tion. Neuer, ys a long day (the prouer­be ys) and also. Neuer, ys a long way. And that those holye fathers in all their workes (which be so manye) dyd neuer [Page 73] make mention of adoring the Sacra­ment, it ys largelye and lowdelye spoken. It would haue eased me very much, if M. Iuell in speakyng this great worde (Neuer) and (in all their bokes) would haue named the bokes, which he taketh to be the proper workes of those holye fathers. For perchaunse he taketh no more for Sainct Cyprian, Sainct Ambro­se, Sainct Chrysostome, Sainct Hiero­me, and Sainct Augustynes workes: then hym selfe hath readen and alowed. And by that way, he may quickly make good his worde, if he shall according vnto his pleasure, denye that boke to be Sainct Ambrose, or Sainct Augustynes, in which any mention is made of adoring the Sa­crament. But if he will be tryed by the consent of Christendom, or by that se­uere and hardye notar of the holye fa­thers, Erasmus: quicklie shall I proue, that either M. Iuell hath not readen all the doctors (which is in hym lykelye,) or that he hath not well remembred them in all places (which euery man doth, as I suppose, generallie,) or that wittingly he [Page] belyeth them, (which sometymes is done lowdely in their pulpites) or that adora­tion of the Sacrament, may be obserued and found in holy Fathers wrytinges, (which is quyte and cleane contrary vn­to, Neuer to be mentioned in them.)

There be extant whole treatiseis, of excellent lerned men, Adoration dew to the Sacrament as concernyng the profe and testymony of worshipping the hol [...]e Sacrament, but one place or two shall be as good for my purpose as a hun­dred, where crakes be made, that no men­tion of adoration, can euer be fownd in any one place of old doctors. S. Chri­sostome therefor in the Chrys. [...]o. 83. in Mat. .83. homylie v­pon S. Mathew sayeth: VVe are fed with that thing, which the Angels seeing do trem­ble at, and can not loke vpon it without [...]ear, bycause of the brightnes which reboundeth from it. Agayn the same blessed Doctor in the .24. Chrys. ho. 24. in .10. cap. Matt. homylie vpon the .10. chap [...] ­ter of the first to the Corinthians shew­eth at large, that, at the least we should doe towardes the Sacrament of the al­tar, that which the Magians dyd, towar­des ow [...] Sauyor lying in the maynger, [Page 74] which dyd come vnto hym, with great reuerence and horror. Which example he repetyng in an oration of his vpon S. Philogo [...]ius, sayeth, Chrys in Ora. in Philogonti [...]n. As thou doest receaue and intertayn God here (menyng in earth) with much honor, so will [...]e receaue the the­re (vndowbtedly in heauen) with much glorye. Li 3. ca. 12. de [...]p. Sctō. Lykewyse S. Ambrose most playn­ly, reasonyng with hym self, how the Pro­phet Danyd in the Psalmes willeth vs to worshipp the footestole of God, which by the interpretation of an other Pro­phet, Esa. ca. 66 ys called the earth: at the length he concludeth: Therefor by the footstoole let the earth be vnderstanded, and by the earth the flesh of Christ, which also at this daye we worship in owr misteryes, and which the Apostles dyd worship in owr Lord Ihesus. Marke the worde, which Sainct Ambrose hath, That to this day, we worsh [...]pp Christ in owr misteries. Because M. Iuel will haue vs to ascend vp (I can not tell how) in to heauen, to worshipp Christ there, as thowgh there wer no [...]ote stoole of his, that is to saie, no flesh of his in earth. For where as S. Augustyne hath these wordes [Page] manifestlye, ( Christ toke earth of earth: for flesh is of the earth, & he toke flesh of the flesh of Marie: and because he walked here in that very flesh, and gaue that very flessh vnto vs to be eaten for owr health, and no man eateth that flessh, except first he adore and worshyp it: it is found owt, how such a fotestoole of owr Lord may be adored, and that we not onlye do not o [...]end in worshipping it, but in not worshipping of it we doe offend) M. Iuell doth expoūd hym after this sort, that the eating of hym, M. Iuell. and worshipping of hym, must ioyne togeather, but we eate hym in heauen (sayth he) ergo we must worshipp hym there. But how much better doth it folow, we eate hym on earth, ergo we must worship hym on earth, where we eate hym: or els to ioyne bothe sayinges togeather, we eate hym in heauen and in earth, ergo we must worship hym in heauē and in earth. For as concernyng those testymonyes, which are alleaged by M. Iuell, M. Iuell. that we must lift vp owr hartes. And, Yf we be rysen agayn with Christ, Coll. 3. Philip. 3. let vs seeke those thinges which are aboue. And agayne, Owr conuersation ys in heauen. By which testi­monies [Page 75] he would conclud, that Christ his body is to be sowght for, only in hea­uen: verely, as the wordes doe sownd di­uinelie and trulie, so is the cōclusion in­ferred very madly and miserablie. Bicause those textes do no more disproue, Christ his body to be on earth reallye, then they proue owr bodies to be now reallie in heauen. As in this short example. Owr conuersation ys in heauen. sayeth S. Paule, and yet, when he spake those wordes, was he not on the earth, in presence of bodie? Doth M. Iuels hart goe owt of his body, when he doth lift it vp to God? Or when I am cōmaunded to seeke those thinges which are aboue, must I make a ladder for my bodye, to clyme vp to heauen?

All blessed men doe counsell, the recea­uers of the Sacrament, to ascend in their hart, to loke vp to heauen, to worshipp Christ sittyng at the right hand of the Father. Which, they doe not therefor counsell, that we should not beleue owr Sauior to be present in his misteries: but bicause they couet to withdraw our ima­ginations from all earthlines, and to geue [Page] vs warnyng, that we doe not make reko­nyng to see with our e [...]e, or perceaue by tast or smell, or grosslye to conceiue by any bodilye sense, the manner, of Christ his being in the Sacrament. For euen then also, when owr Sauior hanged visi­blie vpon the crosse, it might haue ben well sayed to the faithfull, lift vp yowr hartes, and ascend with your myndes, in to heauen, not fastenyng your eyes so much vpon this present forme, most py­tiefull, but rysing with yowr faith, to ap­prehend that infinite maiestie, and diui­nitie, and wysedom, and power of Christ, which is the glorie of his Father in hea­uen, and comfort of all the holie An­gells, and thus presentlie yet now, ys tormented and defaced vpon the earth. As S. Augustyne sayeth very wys [...]lye in the Psalme which I haue fornamed, en­treatyng vppon the adoration of Christ his flessh: It is the spirite, which quickeneth, the flessh profyteth nothing. Aug. in Psal. 98. And therefore when thou doest bowe downe thy selfe, and [...]al prostrate before any such earth, (meanyng the flessh of Christ) looke not vpon it, as [Page 76] it were earth, but looke vpon that [...]oly one, whose fotestoole it is, which thou doest wor­shipp. So that the bodye of Christ, being present vpon the altar, bycause we are all very prone to grosse cogitations, and sensible loues, therefor may it be sayed most iustly vnto vs, lift vp yowr hartes, goe vp towardes heauen with them, there lett yowr thowghtes be occupyed. As who should saye: bycause (good people) yow here, that this is his body, and yow see it yet in a simple forme, as lying vppon an altar, and caryed in mennes handes, The tru [...] meaning of lift vp yowr har­tes. bro­ken also and deuyded, yow may perchaū ­se, haue to base and lowe cogitations.

But, I tell yow, ascend in yowr myndes, dilate yowre hartes, and enlarge yowre thowghtes. This is his bodye, in deed, as he hath spoken hymself the word, which can not be false, and this ys his bloude.

But whose body and bloud? lyft vp yowr hartes now, The body of the second per­son in trinite, the onlye begotten of the Father, the maker of the world, the wise­dome of God, the ouerlooker of all crea­tures, good and badd, angells and diuells, [Page] men, and beastes, the sercher of owr [...] hartes, the disposer of tymes, the iud­ge of the worlde, the felicytie and ioye of the good, the terror and feare of the condempned. Lyft vpp yowr hartes I saye. Thinke you that here ys present, a bodye or flessh onlye? And that, as in di­seases some whott meates doe cumfort the bodye, so that yow haue but a ly­uely peece of his [...]lessh onlye? Or els, doe you conceaue the matter after this sort, that as one f [...]nde sendeth to an o­ther a morsell of good meate, which the other had not: that so Christ in this ban­ket geueth vnto euery man a tast, or els a portion onlye of his pretious bodye, as it were a most excellent gyft, but yet baser, then his sowle and diuinitie? O, lift vpp your hartes. You must not seeke Christ so grosselye, looke not to haue hym so vpon the earth. Christ ys one perfect person, God and man, maker of all tymes, and borne according to flesh in tyme, euerlasting lyfe, and yet putt to most shamefull death, reignyng at the right hand of God his father, and present [Page 77] among men vpon the altar. Stick not therefor I say vnto the body, lett not your thoughtes and desires rest in the flessh onlye: but goe hyer by your faith, and cō ­sider that blessed sowle of his, so chast, pa­tient, wise, charitable, bright, glorious, and yet hyer and hyer, in to the very hea­uens, and aboue all heauens, beholding and wondering, how the maker of them all, whom thowsand thowsandes, and ten hundred thousand thousands do wayte vpon: ys present here for vs, to be recea­ued of vs, and to incorporate vs in to hym selue.

This lo [...] haue I spoken more largelie, bi­cause M. Iuell hath no other way, to an­swer S. Augustine, but to declare (as we denye it not vnto them, but which thei haue lerned of vs) that we must ascend with our hartes, in to heauen, and there honor Christ. Which being most true, and grawnted vnto hym, he doth vntruly and ignorantlye to say, that Christ is not to be honored also in earth, in the sa­crament of his very bodye and bloud, bycause he is to be honored in heauen. [Page] For we doe not diuide Christ, and make one Christ to be in heauē, an other to be on earth, one bodye in heauen, an other in earth: but men worshipp hym in hea­uen one God, and the Angells worshipp hym in the Sacrament here on earth, (as S. Chrisostome Chrysost. lib. 3. de Sacer. proueth,) And men wor­ship hym, as he lieth vpon the altar: and Angells worship hym, as he sitteth at the right hand of God his father. And so both Angells and men, Angels & catholike m [...]n wor­ship Christ both in earth and in heauen. doe worshipp Christ, both in earth and in heauen, and that, not with two kindes of honors, one for holy dayes, an other for working, but with one salfe same honor and worship. The pro­testants wold be seen to say much, when they appeale so often to heauen, and re­ceaue Christ, sitting at the right hand of God, as who shold saie, the papistes myn­des, goe no hyer then the priestes han­des, when he sheweth the Sacramēt vnto them. And when they haue supposed, that this is true, then loe they triumph, in re­cityng S. Chrisostome, S. Augustyne, S. Hierome, and then are they sorye, that old holie fathers be not regarded. But [Page 78] the answer vnto them, is readie, that they haue sa [...]ed therein very well, but nothing to the purpose. for Catholykes doe be­leue, that they must lift vp their hartes, and seeke for Christ in heauen, and wor­ship hym at the right hand of his Father [...] but protestantes denye, that Christ is re­allie present in the Sacrament, or that he is to be worshipped therein: which I shal disproue, a litle more.

S. Augustyne, August. in Psal. 21. vpon the .21. Psalme: The riche of the earth, (sayth he) haue eaten also the bodye of their Lorde, but they haue not been fulfylled, as the poore men were, in fo­lowing of Christ, That Christ is to be ado­red in the Sacrament but yet they dyd worship hym. Now, M. Iuell cōfesseth, that where we eate Christ, there we worship Christ. ergo these riche men, of whom the Pro­phet and S. Augustyne speak, which did eate Christ on the earth, did worshipp hym also on the earth, for in heauen they did not eate hym, bicause they folowed hym not, as the poore did, which worthe­lie did receaue hym. Again, how could the gentyles haue misreported the Chri­stians in the primitiue church for hono­ring [Page] of Ceres and Bacchus (the false goddes ouer bread and wyne) except they had geuen some argument thereof in deed, Aug. li. 20 cōtr. [...]au­stum, ca. 13 by reason of honoring Christ in the Sacramēt? For if an Ethnyk shold be­hold a Christian, after grace sayd, to eate his meate sauorlie and soberlye, he could not think, that he worshipped Ceres and Bacchus therein. But when the panymes hard saye, that the Christians dyd eate the flesh of theyr God, and when they could see nothing but bread and wyne, which were receaued with all reuerence and deuotion: they might not saye, that is was onlie bread, bycause of the honor, which at the presence thereof, the Chri­stians exhibited vnto it: and they could not saye, it was the bodye of Christ, by­cause, that being yet infydells, they were not instructed in owr misteries: it re­mayned then, to think and to report, that vndoubtedlie, Christians dyd worshipp Ceres and Bacchus. Which proueth, that the Sacrament was then adored and worshipped. Besides this, it ys gathered owt of the same blessed Doctor, that, In lib. sint. prosperi. [Page 79] we doe honor thinges inuisible, I meane flessh and bloud, vnder the forme of bread and wyne, whiche we see. And we doe not take these two kyndes, after lyke sort, as we dyd before the consecration: whereas we confesse faythfullie, that before the consecra­tion, it is bread and wyne, which nature for­med, but after the consecration; it ys the flessh and bloud of Christ, which blessing hath halowed. But yet for all those testimo­nye, what sayeth M. Iuell? ‘It is a verie now deuyse, M. Iuell. (quod he) and which as it is well knowē, came but latelie in to the church, about .iij. hundred yeares past, Hono [...]us being Bishop of Rome, and cōmaunding the Sacramēt to be li [...]ed vp, and the people reuerentlie to bowe downe to [...]. After hym Vrbanus the fowerth appointed [...] holydaie of Corpus Christ, &c.’ Thre [...] hundred yeares are, [...] but, a very litle [...] with [...]ow; when we [...]al­ke of the adoration of the sacrament but if we come to the glorious setters furch of the new fownd Ghospell, thirtie yea­res lacking [...] ( [...] computationem Eccelesi [...] Anglica [...]) doe [...]ke a grea [...] antiquitie. And then, [...], or after hym [Page] Zuinglius, must be named fathers and A­postells, when very blessed Bisshoppes, Honorius, and Vrbanus, whom all Chri­stendome assented vnto, are named con­temptuouslie as who should say, I knew them, whem thei did stand withowt the church doores, and could not read any letter in the b [...]ke. But goe to, when Ho­norius did commaund the adoration of the sacrament, dyd any countrey of all Christendome, or Cytie or godlye man, speake agaynst it? Or when S. Vrbane a­poynted an holidaye for it, is it writen or extant by any argument, that it was re­fused 1 in any place? The popes, I am sure, 2 were not withowt counsell. the Vnyuer­sities, were not withowt great scholars. 3 religious houses, and orders, were not thē 4 destroyed. the holy ghost in true Catho­lykes 5 was inuincible. the wicked spirite in heretykes, would haue been venterous. 6 a good man with the daunger of his life, would haue spoken the trueth. an here­tyke 7 to wynne a fame, would not haue passed vpon death, the dyuel also being his comforter, and in these so manye cau­ses [Page 80] whi the trueth should not be suppressed, is it possible, that withowt open cō ­tradiction, [...] a false honor of God, should be receiued among Christians, therough the whole world? yf the adoration of the Sacrament were in deed blasphemous being so receaued, as it was in all Chri­stēdome, so many people runnyng head­long (as you ween) in to their damnatiō, did the holy ghost stirr vp no one good man to call them back? That holy ghost, which was promysed before, and is now performed vnto the church of Christ, which ys an inuincible, immortall▪ and coaeternall God, with the father and the soune? which geueth seuenfold graces, and emong those seuen, one especially of fortitude: would he suffer all his church, to be beaten downe, and would geue strength not so much as to one, agaynst whom all his aduersaries, should not be able to preuaile? In the tyme of the synagoge, and in that night, when a generall Idolatric was committed: our mercifull God, euer dyd vse to raise vpp some one Prophete, or other, whom [Page] he would not only to speake, but whom he would also maintein, both to speake and to be hard: if not to the peoples pro­fiting (bicause of their infidelitie) yet to their cōdemnation (bicause of his iustice and equitie) and that posteritie of them might know, how to feare God, and hym alone to honor. And although Esaie, Iere­mie, and other Prophetes haue ben slain, yet haue theyr wordes still continued in memorie and writing▪ for who can resist God almightie, and lett, that his will goe not forward? And now in the tyme of grace, when Christ liueth neuer any more to die, when the sonn of Iustice shineth, and men walke honestlie, as it were in the day: is it not besides, not onlie all faith, but all reason also, that an vniuersall Idolatrie, should be cōmitted and authorized in the church, and that by no prophete or prea­cher, it should be presentlie controlled? Behold, when Nicolaus, one of the seauen first Deacons, when Arrius, Eunomius, Martion, Donatus, or any other heretike, did begin to spring, straitwaies the church hath noted hym, althowgh bicause of the [Page 81] violence of princes, she hath not been able, straytewayes to oppresse it. And were the paine neuer so greate, and the power and number for maintenaunce of the heresie neuer so outragious, yet God neuer left hym selfe withowt testimonie: and valiāt Catholykes were found, which would not shrink in the cause of trueth, not for the Emperour, and all his soul­dyars. Athanasius the great, is alone, [...]xample strong inowgh for all. Yea there is so great strength in a spirite, that when a ve­rie true cause, is sett vpon and inuaded by falsehode, the person whom the dyuel doth possesse for that purpose, will vtter hym self and be knowen, if all the worlde fay nay, and come against hym. Example in Luther, whom neither Pope, neither Emperour could make to hold his peace. And when he is dead, yet will his scho­lars, althowgh they can not maynteyne his doctrine, preserue yet his name, that it may be sayde: Doctor Martin Luther began to set [...] vpp the Ghospell in the yeare of owr Lord M. D. XVII. a worthie man, and greiuouse agaynst the pope: [Page] All be it in the greatest matter, his scholar was better lerned then he, and fowght against the master. How then standeth owr case? Vrbanus a blessed pope appointed an ho­lyday in the honor of the bodie of Christ and it was ioyfullie receaued thorowgh the whole church, without any open con­tradiction, and could it be Idolatrie? No, if it had been against the glorie of God, not onlie it should not haue been vniuer­sallie receaued, but not so much as par­ticularlye suffered without some euident resistance. And there would haue ben fownd in a thowsand religious howses, and in vniuersities, and in wel ordered cy­ties, and (I beleue) in verie meane how­seholdes, some, which rather would haue dyed, then haue committed idolatrie.

Especiallie, whereas it hath ben promised vnto Iacob his seede, which is performed in the church, Non est idolum in Iacob, Nu. 23. there is no Idole in Iacob: and whereas God so expresselie sayeth to vs by Ezechiel, ca. 36. I will clense you from all yowr Idolls. Then loe, what a shame­full pride is this, a weake head, not a­greeing [Page 82] with other, not knowing hym selfe, behind so many in yeares, aboue so few in lerning, to make so light of the concord of Christ his church, and of her maiestie, that with a light worde, he da­reth to cōdemne, two blessed gouernours of her, Honorius, and Vrbanus, with all Bishoppes, Doctors, diuines, religious or­ders, secular priestes, such which lyued in good order al the tyme sence, and to cō ­demne Emperour, Kynges, Princes, counselars, with all the deuoute laytie of tho­se times and after? But what doth he say? Honorius (quod he) was abowt three hun­dred yeares past. why Sir, is not three hun­dred yeares a faire age? This argument A weake argument of M. [...] soundeth as consequentlie, as if one stry­uing with an other, vpon a question of lerning, would answer hym, with tussh man, I know this better then thou, for I am thirtie yeares yoūger then thow. Wel Honorius was three hundred yeares past or there about: and he was deceaued, (say you) or he is not at the least much to be regarded, as I can tell you for soth by that I haue lyued these fortie yeares [Page] or there abowt, and am now Bishop not of Rome but of Sarum, in much wise­dome and authoritie. But may we so sa­felie [...]lude the answer of God, and reiect his blessed will vttered by the mowth of holie men, that the cause it selfe shall be accompted childeysh, bycause they, which promoted it, were not fifteen hundred yeares old, but men of three hundred yeares onlie, as it were childerie of three yeares, in respect and comparison of the reuerend Iohn of Salisburie? It is not the age, which maketh verities, but the word of God, and the consent of the church, whose voyce especiallie, ys much to be considered. Vrhanus (saye yow) was after Honorius. M. Iuell. What of that? be these later yeares so accursed, that there can be fownd no good men in them? I fynd no fault with Luther, bycause he is of no antiquitie, but bycause, he addeth thereunto, the breach of good order and vnitie. And in Sainct Vrbanus, I doe not so much obserue, that he made a new ho­ly daye, but this is much to be marked, that all Christendome did keepe it with [...]owt [Page 83] any murmur, and rebellion. And agayne, his decree dyd not make that, which was before prophane, to be ho­lye, but the holines of the Sacrament, and the enemye Berengarius, whom the dyuel stirred agaynst it, did cause hym, to apoynt the tyme, wherein it might b [...] celebrated and honored, with especiall memorie. Christ his birth, was to be wor­shipped, before the holidaye was there­unto appoynted, and the consubstan­tialitie of the father and the soun, was before the concell of Nice, and when orders begin to decay, new statutes are made for the rapayring of them, not, as who should saye, they were never vsed before, but that it should not come to passe, that they might be quite forgat­ten hereafter. And therefor it is false, that the adoration of the Sacrament, was neuer before Honorius decree and S. Vr­banus holidaye, of whom, by the pro­testantes iudgmentes, it is to late to say, God haue mercie on their sowles, bicau­se they are allreadie cōdempned for their idolatrie, as the heretykes can terme it.

[Page] O S. Thomas Aquinas, whose labors in the makyng of the seruice for Corpus Christi daye, I can not but remembr [...], the octaues of that feast now being pre­sent, are thei all lost, and art thow thi self togeather with them condempned? It was not for a man alone, to compile out of bothe testamentes so manye testimo­nyes, for the sacrament, and so compile them, that lyke two Cherubins, the old should looke vpon the new, aud the new answer the old: It was not of flesh so to doe, but of the spirite of God. Read o­uer the antempnes, the respondes, the versicles, of that blessed daye, and by the ve­rie sound and sense of them, thei declare plainlie from whence thei proceded. The first respond owt of the old lawe is this: The numbre of the children of Israel, Exod. 12. shall offer vp a kydd, at the euening tyde of their passeouer, and thei shall eate fl [...]sh and vnlea­uened bread. The versicle answering the same, out of Sainct Paules epistle, is this: Christ our passeouer ys offered vp, 1. Cor. 5. therefore lett vs eate in the vnleauened bread of since­ritie and veritie. Againe, an other respond [Page 84] is: Helias looking back, 3. Re. 19. dyd see at his head a cake, and rysing, dyd eate and drinck: and with the strength of that meate, he walked vnto the hyll of God. This is the respond, but what is there in the new testament to answer this? It foloweth owt of Sainct Iohn his Ghospell. Io. 6. Yf any man eate of thys bread, he shall lyue for euer. It ys wri­ten in Iob: The men of my tabernacle haue sayd, Iob. 31. who might geue vs of his flesh, that we might be satisfied? and the respond is, that whyles thei were at supper Christ toke bread, and brake it, Matt. 26. Mar. 14. and gaue it, and sayed, take ye, and eate ye, this is my bodie. What could haue been deuysed more agreeable and comfortable? Then, in other partes of the seruice, how playnelie ys the faith of the church, in how few wordes, declared? and how effectuallie be the effectes of the sa­crament proponed? O holie feast (sayeth the antempne of the later euensong) in which Christ ys receaued, the memorie of his passion ys repeted, the mynd ys filled with grace, and a pledge of the glorie to come, ys geuen vnto vs. The heretykes say, that we must remembre Christ his passion, and [Page] that, that ys the verie some of the institu­tion of the Sacrament. But they forget three partes of the whole: bycause, we not onlie remember his passion, but we receaue hym also in deed, and grace pre­sentlie ys geuen vnto vs, and a pledge of the glorie to come hereafter. The church tawght them, euē that veritie which thei hold (as it appereth in the praier of cor­pus Christi daye) Of Corpus Christi daye and of the ser­uice of that holye daye. O God which hast left vnto vs the memorie of thi passion. vnder a wonderfull sacrament (but then she sayeth further) Grawnt vs, we besech the, so to ho­nor the holie misteries of thy body and bloud, that we may daylie feele in owr selues, the fruct of thi redemption. So then, she grawn­teth the memorie of his passion, but she holdeth the veritie of his bodie: she pel­teth not with God, denying this to be his body, bicause she is cōmaunded to do this in remembrāce of hym: but she doth best remembre hym, when she hath the bodie which suffered, before her. She calleth the sacramēt, the misteries of his bodye and bloud, & yet she doth plainelie adore and worship his presence, which is couered. I [Page 85] may seem to be to long in my seruice, but certēlie, if we should cōsider the maruei­louse wisedome of almighty God, and the multitude of misteries, which by the mowth of S, Thomas, were vttered in that matter, it were argumēt inough that it come frō God. And is all this geare lost now? And where as most manifest mira­cles, haue testifyed vnto the world, that our Sauyor accepteth hym, and hath takē hym in to heauē, shal the sprite of pride & lyeing, with one worde, cōdempne hym, euerlastinglie? Thāked be God, that euer the holiday was made, in the worship of Christ his body in the sacrament. for this 1 argumēt is so euidēt, that bothe he, which can read no letter in the boke, & an other 2 which wil read no good thing, & the third 3 which for honest necessarie busynes, can not well intend it, all yet be sufficientlie warned, what to think of the Christiās sacramēt, bicause they haue cōpted it wor­thie, of an especial holiday. And wher as, no text, can be alleaged so plaine, for ad­oration (no not owt of this verie seruice which is for corpus Christi day) but the [Page] heretykes, will putt it owt of strength by spirituall and misticall vnderstanding (which wordes thei vnderstand not them selues, but lyke smoke vanysh awaye, in their cogitatiōs) yet the apointing of an holydaye in honor of the sacrament, ys so manifest an argument against them, that they haue no other remedie, but to saye, Vrbanus was not auncient inowgh for them. Which holye pope, if he had wry­ten a whole boke, in the prayse and ho­nor of the sacramēt, Isichius li. 6. ca. 22. in leui. Ambr. li. 6 de Sacra. Damas. lib. 4. cap. 14. calling it (as the ho­lie doctors haue done) the bread of liffe, the bread of diuyne substance, the bread vnited to the diuinitye, the pledge of e­verlasting ly [...]e, the bodie most holie, pre­tiouse, saue, inestimable, with an hundred other such tytles, they would haue esca­ped by leing or denying.

But now, what can they saye? not on­lie S. Vrbanus, of the ado­ration of Christ his body p̄sent in the Sa­crament. but all Christendome, not onlie doe speake, but commaund, and proue by sensible and visible argument, that the very bodie of owr Sauior, is in the Sacramēt, and that they adore it, with a proper holidaye. But Christ (sayeth M. [Page 86] Iuell) and his Apostles, M. Iuell. the holie fathers in the primitiue church, the doctors, that fo­lowed them, and other lerned men, whatsoe­uer for the space of a thousand and two hun­dred yeares after Christ, neuer heard of it. Neuer? will you abyde by it? M. Iuell. Yea (sayeth he) once agayne I saye, for the space of a thowsand and two hundred yeares, after Christ his ascension in to heauen, this wor­shipping of the Sacrament, was neuer knowen or practised, in any place, within the whole Catholyke church of Christ, within the who­le world. Here I am at a staye, I tell yow troth: bycause I can not tell, by which waye I might begin to answer, so vehe­ment an asseueration. For were it best (think I) to tell hym, he lyeth, and to proue it? or to wish hym shame onlie, and to permitt the matter to the handes of God? or to reason with hym, as if he were present? or what waye might I ta­ke? I haue alleaged S. Ambrose, and S. Augustyn before, and if those two be not sufficient, Theodoretus sayeth, that the misticall signes remayn in their formar sub­stance, and figure and forme, Theod. dial. 2. and they may [Page] be seen and felt as they were before, but they are vnderstode to be those thinges which they are made, and they are beleued and adored, as being those thinges, which they are bele­ued to be. Euthimius also sayeth, in the 64. chap. vpon S. Mathew: Lett vs so do [...], in the worshipping of the misteries, not onlie looking on those thinges, Euthi. cap. 64. i Mat. which are sett before vs, but beleuing, his wordes. And whereas be sayeth, this is my bodie, this is my bloud, lett vs obey hym, and beleue hym. Further more Eusebius Emissenus in his fifth ser­mon of Easter, he sayth, Behould, with thy faith, honor and wonder at the holye bodye and bloud of thy Lorde. Eusebius. Emis. ho. 5 [...] pascho. But none of these are plaine inough for M. Iuell. I doe aske hym therefore, what S. Iames meant, in his liturgie or masse, when that, lifting vp the gift (which is the consecrated host) he crieth owt holie thinges, for the holie.

Yf he sayed (holie) in that respect onlye that Christ sitteth in heauen: Iacob. in Litur. sua. why doth he then lift vp the Sacrament? Agayne, in S. Basile his masse, Of lyfting vp of the sacrament. at the tyme of re­ceauing, the Bishop lifting vp the bread, sayeth, Looke doune o Lord [...] Christ [Page 87] owr God, owt from thy holie tabernacle, and come to sanctifie vs, thow which sittest aboue togeather with thy father, and art togeather with vs here inuisiblie. Vouchsafe, with thy mightye hand, to geue vnto vs, In Missa S. Basil. thy holie and vndefiled bodie, and pretiouse bloud, and by vs sinners, vnto the whole people. And what meaneth S. Basile, by lifting vp the bread, and by so deuoute a prayer, and by that which foloweth, when, with a great voy­ce he cryeth, holie thinges, for the holie?

Also, how is it sayd in S. Chrisostome his masse, that the priest, after the lyke praier made as S. Basile hath, taketh a portion of the host, which is on the holie paten, and lifting it vp a litle, sayeth, holie thin­ges, for the holie, the clerkes and the peo­ple answering, one holie, one Lorde, in the glory of God his father? But to lett these questions goe, I will come more nerer, and be certified of M. Iuell, whether Christ were the very soun of allmighty God or no? whether his bodie is to be worshipped or no? whether he be reallye and trulie, in the Sacrament of the faith­full? M. Iuell denyeth, that in any place [Page] in the whole world, twelue hundred yea­res after Christ, the worshipping of the Sacrament was vsed. But I aske, whether any doctor or good man, in the space of twelue hundred yeares after Christ, did beleue, that Christ was reallie in the Sa­crament? It can not be denyed, but that holie men did beleue so. As S. Damasce­ne witnesseth, Damase. li. 4. orth. fid. sa [...]eing: Bread and w [...]ne are not the figure of the bodye and [...]loud of Christ,(God [...]bead) but the verie bodie, indued with the Godhead: whereas our Lord hym self sayeth, this is my bodie and not a figure of my bodie. And lykewyse Algerus in his booke de Sacramento altaris, is verye manifest. And again, B [...]engarius, which denied the veritie of Christ his bodie in the Sacrament, and would haue nothing but a figuratiue bodie there, he was con­dempned by a generall councel, in which Lanfrancus Bishop of Canterburye was a cheife doer agaynst that heresie, and wrot a boke, by name agaynst Berenga­rius. Therefor it can not be denied, but that these men, which (again I saye) ly­ued within the compasse of twelue hun­dred [Page 88] yeares, after Christ his ascension: did verelie beleue, as the Catholykes and pa­pistes doe at these daies. Yf then, Lan­francus Archebishop of Canterburie, be­leued, that Christ was verelie and reallie (not as Berengarius the heretyke sayed, who can saue M. lu­ell in this place frō a pla [...]e lye. figuratiuelie onlie) in the Sacrament: er­go he dyd worship our Sauior there pre­sent, ergo a lerned blessed man hath worshipped the Sacrament, within a thou­sand two hundred yeares after Christ his ascention, ergo some man hath made a foule lie. Certenlie, yow can not escape here, master myne. For if Lansrācus were 1 one of that councel which condempned Berengarius, and if Berengarius heresie 2 was, that these wordes of Christ, This ys my bodye, are no otherwyse to be taken, then those other of his, I am the vyne, and if no Christians hart can choose, but ho­nor 3 the bodie of his Sauyor, and if Lan­francus 4 lyued within twelue hūdred yea­res after Christ: ergo, there was honoring of the sacrament, before three hundred yeares last passed, and therefore the me­morie hath [...]ailed the preacher. But yet, [Page] there was no lacke of memorie, and the proposition dyd not escape M. Iuelles mouth vnware, for he stowtlie repeteth it, with. once agayn I saie, that a thousand two hundred yeares after Christ his ascenti­on, the worshipping of the sacrament, was ne­uer knowen. Well Syr, the presence was knowen, if you answer, it was not: whithē was Berengarius condempned, which denied the presence? If it were confes­sed: how could it, but be worshipped? I had rather one should answer, that Lan­francus and the councell called Vercellē ­se, dyd not beleue the presence of Christ in the sacrament (which were verie igno­rantlie and vntrulye spoken, thei con­dempnyng Berengarius, for an heretyke) then to saye, that for all his presence, thei dyd not worship hym. For that is not onlie ignorantlie, but allso wickedlie and blasphemo [...]slie spoken. Lanfrancus then was within twelue hundred yeares next after Christ, He lyued An. Do. 1052. and he beleued, with all the Catholykes of that tyme, Christ to be reallie present in the Sacrament: ergo the worshipping of the Sacramēt, was knowē [Page 89] within the cumpasse of the yeares, which M. Iuell rekoneth vpon: so that all is not the Ghospell which he spenketh.

But will you here now a pretie coniectu­re of his? for conclusion I can not call it, which maketh to no purpose. After the people began (sayeth he) to worship the sa­crament with godlie honor, M. Iuell. the lerned men, and schole doctors, that then were: sawe, it could not stand, without great daunger, and confessed, that the ignorant sort might be lea­den in to Idolatrie. And what of this? yf there be daunger in worshipping an host not consecrated, how then? Shall the ho­nor due to Christ his bodye, be taken a­waye? In the beginnyng of your sermon, nothing to the purpose, it was proued, that abuses; haue crept in to the sacra­ment▪ would yow therefor, the sacrament also to be abolished. yf a leud priest (with whom you were well acquaynted, or els you b [...] light of belefe) hath ben knowen, for manye yeares space, not to haue cō ­secrated the host, shal honest priestes the­refor, which do consecrate, be suspected, and the true sacrament dishonored? The [Page] lerned men, of whom yow speak, dyd ne­uer doubt, but the sacrament was to be honored, but some of them dyd cast the worst, saying, what if, by malice of the priest, or other wyse, there should be no consecration at all? how then shall we think (sayed they) is there anye idola [...]e committed of the ignorant people? But you suppose, they made this argument, It may chaunce, that an host not conse­crated be lifted vp, and honored of the people, which thing ys daungerouse: er­go it had ben better, neuer to haue ma­de corpus Christi daye, or it were well done to take awaie the sacrament. For this must be your conclusion, to proue, that euen by the verie scholemen, adora­tion is taken awaie, or not alowed. For if this be not proued, yow are fallen from your matter, and you talke of scholemen, besides all lernyng. Yet graunt that there ys daunger (bycause the dyuel hath his chapelaines) it is easelie remedied, euen according vnto them, which thowght good, that the sacrament be worshipped vnder this cōdition, if consecration were [Page 90] performed. But according to the truth, there is no daunger at all. As I wil proue, which yet neadeth not (because daūger or daunger not, adoration ys due vnto the host trulye cōsecrated) yet, for the more plaines, I will shew, the people to be safe, without all question. for the vulgar and true Catholykes, allthowgh vnskilfull in knowledg, yet stedfast in faith, when thei beleue once, that our Sauyor left his bo­die vnto his welbeloued church, in for­me of bread, and gaue the power vnto priestes, of consecrating the same his bo­die: or if the people be not able to make such distinction, yet if they beleue, what so euer the church teacheth, and if they agree to the ordinances of her: then loe they, in hearing of masse, and adoring the Sacrament, the inten­tion of the priest is not to be serched of the people. are not bound to make serch of the intention of the priest, but vnder this faith, that all is well done in the Ca­tholyke church, and that Christ is to be worshipped vnder forme of bread, their deuotion is harmeles vnto them, and ac­ceptable vnto God. Matth. 5. If thy eye be simple, sayeth owr Sauior) all thy whole bodye is [Page] lightsome, and therfor, the intentiō of the people, being good, & directed vnto that first veritie, that Christ our Sauior hath left his bodie vnto vs, in forme of bread: what so euer knauerie or dyuelishnes, be wrought of man, in some particular host, it hurteth not the pietie, of the good and denote people. And god, which is the ser­cher of the hartes, doth receaue vnto him selfe, that honor which they haue apoin­ted for him, in the Sacramēt. For they see, the priest to reuest hym selfe, to goe to the altar, to make crosses and signes, to kneele downe, to shew vnto them the Sa­crament, they see the forme of bread, and what shold they do then, but worship the Sacramēt? Except perchaūce, any man wil require more then a man his knowledge in a man. For I wold aske the question, of that scrupulouse conscience, which fea­reth where no cause of feare is, and say to hym: Good felow, why doest thow not kneele doune, at sacring, and worship the body of Christ? It appeareth, by thy plain countenance and apparel, that thow fea­rest not hurting of thy knee, or breaking [Page 91] of thy hose, as some strayt pointed gentil­men do leane vnto a pillar of the church, for such lyke causes: but some ernest mat­ter there is, which moueth the▪ Yea for sothe Sir, for (and if it please you, a litle to come a side,) I heard a preacher once say: that some priestes, do mock the peo­ple, and do not cōsecrate the bread. And thē, if there be no cōsecration, I heard the same preacher say, there is no adoration due vnto it, which thing he also proued, owt of I can not tell, what old doctors & lerned mens bokes. If I were therfor sure, that the priest doth cōsecrate, I wold then trulie, worship my maker. How then wilt thow be sure? hath he not vestmētes vpō hym? is he not at the altar? doth he not al thinges as good priestes shold do? Yes, but I wold know his intēt and meaning, by his owne word. Why, wold his worde quiet the? or might not he thinke one think and speak an other? Mary therefor (as the preacher noted) it were good, ne­uer to worship Christ in the Sacrament, for feare, least thorough the priest his dissimulatiō, I shold haue nothing els there [Page] but bread, and so commit idolatrie. Nay, good felow, that was not the wysest preacher, that euer thow hast heard: because, sure I am, thow honorest they father and mother, with all obedience and seruice, (if they be a lyue) and with thy dailye praier (if they be departed:) but art thow sure, that they are thy father and mother, which are sayd to be? what discretion ha­dest thow, before thow were begotten? how sayest thow then? if that preacher shall rule the: not onlie, not thow thy sel­fe, but no man at all, shall worshipp any man or woman for father or mother. By­cause we are not otherwyse sure of them, but that we beleue the whole parishe, which doth testifie it. And then, if autho­ritie shall preuaile, the whole world testi­fyeth, that in the masse tyme Christ is present, in forme of bread: so that thow needest not, to make any more question hereof, then whether thy father, be thy father or no. And this I speak, to declare, that as long, as we be in the world, we should seeke for no further profe of thin­ges, than may be gathered of heering, [Page 92] seeing, and other senses. And therefor, perceauing by all externall signes, that any priest at masse, doth as the church hath appoynted, I should not desyre, to creepe in to his bosome, and to withstād or withhold the worshipping of the Sa­crament, which the church teacheth me, vntill I know the priest his thowght and intention. Well Sir yet▪ (would the felow saye) albeit I must beleue, that in the Sa­crament, Christ his bodie is present, and sould require no further profe thereof, then the authoritye of Christ and his church: yet, (me thinketh) the case with vs poore people is harde, when we wor­ship Christ in the Sacramēt, if he be not in the Sacramēt because of the leuden [...] of the priest, Quis vel insanus [...]ūculpandum putet, quieis o [...]ficia debita im­penderit, quos parentes esse ere diderit, e­tiā si nō es­sent? Quis contrà, non exterminā dū iudica­uerit, qui veros for­tasse parentes minimè dilexerit, dum, ne fal sos diligat, metuit. August. de vtilit. cre­dendi ad Honoratū. which made no consecra­tion▪ No, no, good felowe, [...] harme is done at all vnto the. For suppose this, (which is possible inowght, that there wer [...] one so lyke thy owne father, that [...] could not be discerned, which of the two, were thy true father in d [...]d, Yf thow shouldest honor the counterfayte, thin­kyng hym, to be thy true father, might [Page] thy naturall father (trowest thow) iustlye be offended there withall? or bicause thou couldest not haue any certayn marke, in this doubtefull case, wouldest thow ho­nor no father at all? They, which stand behind a pillar in the church, or behind their neighbours backes, or which at the tyme of eleuatiō looke downe vpon the grownd, doe not they worshipp (if theyr mynd be good) Christ in the Sacramēt? And yet they behold not that host, which is present, ne bind themselues vnto those singular formes, whiche they myght be­hold, for the looking vp: but simplie and plainely, they worship the true bodye of Christ, which is vnder the forme of visi­ble bread, when it is rightly consecrated, as they take the host vppon theyr parish church to be. And if it be otherwise, it is a pryuate and deadlye synn of the priest, and a particular error of theires, nothing hurting or letting the proper obiect and staie of their fayth, vnto which their de­uotion ys caryed. And, to lett hym goe now, with whom I seemed to talke all [Page 93] this whyle, and to returne vnto M. Iuell, the lerned men dyd, in deed, make ob­iection, as thowgh there might be dawn­ger in worshypping of an host vncon­secrated: And therefor (sayeth Master Iuell) they gaue warning of it. M. Iuell. which [...] wordes, import so much, as if the schole­men should saye, take heede good peo­ple, what yow doe: yow may be poyso­ned, the host may chaunse not to be con­secrated, and then, M. Iuell vnderstandeth not the schole men whom he alleaged there is dawnger of idolatrie. And so, the people should be dimissed with scruple of conscience, as M. Iuell vnderstandeth the scholemen, which is nothing so▪ for the conclusion of scholes, and answer vnto that obie­ction, which Master Iuell alleageth, ys, that the people are withowt all daunger, in so much, that the opinion of worshyp­ping the Sacrament vnder a condition, ys refused of the best lerned.

Now, as concerning Duns and Du­rand Master Iuell, reporteth of them by these wordes. That they thowght it best, to remoue away the bread, M. Iuell, and to bring in [Page] transubstantiation (for it were remayned the substance of [...] and how [...] vnto [...]? What is he, which [...]ring [...] wordes, and know­ing, neither the places where Dun [...] and Durand say [...] or any good lernyng be­sides, wol [...] not [...] Duns and Du­rand, dyd so cast their heades to geather, as thowgh they were able to bring th [...] opinions, in to the articles of owr Crede, and as thowgh transubstantiation were inuented and authorised by them, and not rather cōfirmed by the whole church of Christ. It ys a shamefull kynd of lye­ing, when, the true orderers of Christ his church, shall be suppressed with si­lens, and when the ve [...]tyes of the Ca­tholyke faith, shall be attributed vnto the disputatio [...] of [...]holemen. Sainct Tho­mas indeed, hath this argument, D. Thom. 3. part. qu. 75. art. 2. that it ys agaynst the worshipping of the Sacra­ment, if any crea [...]ed substance, which may not be worshipped with godlie honor, should be there: ergo (sayeth he) no substance of [Page 94] bread remaineth. Agaynst which reason of his, Duns and Durand both, doe argue verie busilie. and they doe think, that the substance of bread, might be graunted to remain, and yet the bodye of Christ might be worshipped in the Sacrament, withowt all daunger of Idolatrie. Note. There­for, M. Iuell, as cunnyng as he maketh hym selfe in Duns and Durād, doth so far and fowl [...]e, goe [...]de of theyr meanyng and opinion, that they argued the plaine contrarie vnto that which he reporteth of them. For, whereas he interpreteth then sayinges after thi [...] manner, Iuell. that, for au [...]yding of idolatrie in the Sacrament, the substance of bread must be remoued: they reason a playne contrarie way▪ and argue (their obedience vnto the church all­wayes reserued) that for all the remay­ning of [...]read, Duns and Durand. yet the bodie of Christ might be in the Sacrament, and withowt daunger honored. But they speak therein lyke scho­lemen, and also lyke aduersaries of Sainct Thomas, whose argumentes▪ whiles they discussed to the vttermost▪ they haue fal­len some tymes in to the suspition, either [Page] of enuie, or curiositie. And see agayne, how litle it hangeth togeather, that, which M. Iuell would father vpon them? Yf there be any substance of bread in the Sacrament, M. Iuell. (sayeth master Iuell in his cō ­mentarie vpon Duns and Durand) the­re must be daunger of idolatrie: ergo by transubstantiation lett vs take the substan­ce of bread awaye, and then will all thin­ges be safe and su [...]e, and the people shall be cleane voyde of ieopardie. But how can this sense and conclusion seeme agrea­ble to a schole man? For if (as M. Iuell hath tolde vs owt of theire writinges) there be daunger of Idolatrie, when con­secration ys omitted, how much hath Duns holpen the people, by bringing in of transubstantiation, where as the sub­stance of breade neuer so much taken away, yet there may lacke consecration: and that failing, (as master Iuell wee­neth) idolatrie may be committed, and Duns and Durand should misse of their purpose, for which they deuysed trans­substantiation.

Wherefore I wonder at the libertie, [Page 95] which master Iuell taketh vpon hym, in makyng, as pleaseth hym, free reportes vpon the lerned, as thowgh they were easie to be vnderstanded, or he had euer great mynd to read them, or as thowgh his report were of such authoritie, that as he sayeth, so it must be in them.

Now, as concerning Sainct Thomas, which proueth that no bread doth re­maine in the Sacrament, bycause god­lye honor ys geuen vnto it, the autho­ritie and present practise of the church dyd moue hym thereunto. As though he should saye on this wise: The church doth geue godlie honor vnto that, Of trans­substanti­ation. which ys vnder the formes of bread and wyne, but no godlye honor ys due vnto anye pure creature, ergo except the churche should committ Idolatrie (which ys im­possible) no other substance besides the body of Christ, can be conteined in the Sacrament. In which his conclusion, the honor, which the church gaue to the Sacrament, was sufficient vnto hym, to inferr, that no bread remayned, and not his desire, to haue the Sacrament [Page] worshipped, was the motyue and occa­tion, to inuent that no bread remayned. For, to speake the trueth, the scholemen, as they were, for the greater part, men of excellent witt and holynes: so, tho­rowghe the ghift of vnderstanding and cumpassing weightie matters, they went verie farr in serching owt the treasures of all diuinitie, and yet, thorowgh the gra­ce of holynes, which qualified their dee­pe inuentions, they allwayes submitted their conclusions vnto the authoritie of the Catholyke church. In so much, that if a thowsand Dunces and Durandes, shold so decide this question and matter, as master Iuell reporteth of them: yet nee­deth not the Catholyke, for that cause, to be trobled, or the heretyke crake of anye victorie, agaynst the practyse and faith of the churche. But lett vs behold, how master Iuell plaieth the schole man, and vttereth such an insight in the Sa­crament, as the greatest doctors for sub­tilitye, haue neuer marked throwgh their dulnes. For vpon this, which he suppo­seth Duns and Durand to saye (the Sacra­ment [Page 96] ys to be worshipped, ergo no bread must be remayning) he inferreth a contrarie conclusion, M. Iuell. as, that (there ys bread re­mayning, ergo it must not be worshipped.) Wherein both the argument concludeth not, if he will folow Duns and Durand: and the formar proposition ys hereticall, if he would submitt his vnderstanding vnto the Catholyke church. The argu­ment (I saye) and the consequence ys nawght, bycause for soth, by his doctors Duns and Durand the schole men, for all the substance of bread remainyng yet might the Sacramēt be adored and wor­shipped. But that is one doctors opinion. Then also, his antedent ys false, because the church hath so receiued and tawght vs, that the substance of bread ys clean conuerted. And as concernyng master Iuell his profes, of his antecedent, where as he alleageth Sainct Augustyne in a ser­mon of his ad insantes, saying, that which you see vpon the table, ys bread, it doth conclud that the other thing which we be­leue to be vnder those formes of bread is not Christ his naturall bodye. And, I [Page] trow, Sainct Augustyne dyd not meane such bread to be there, as childerne spread their butter vpon. For it is wryten by the same blessed doctor: In lib. sent. Prosperi. VVe honor thinges which we see not, that ys to saye, flessh and bloud, in the forme of bread and wyne which we see. The church also herselfe feareth not, to call the Sacrament bread, why the Sacrament [...]. which yet condemneth all Lutherans and Zuin gl [...]ans. And she calleth the Sacrament bread, bycause the Sacrament hath the forme of bread, and bycause bread in the Scripture signifyeth any foode, and by­cause Christ his bodye ys, in deede, true bread, and bread of life, and heauenlie bread. Therefore, bycause it ys called bread, vpon that onlye to conclud, that it contynueth bakers bread: it ys the ar­gument of thinkers, tailers, and coblers, and not of lerned scholars.

Then, as concerning Gelasius, which sayeth, that the substance of bread, or na­ture of wyne doe not cease to be, (in the Sa­crament,) he expowndeth hym felfe, by that which foloweth strayt after in th [...] same sentence, adding these plaine wor­des, [Page 97] But they remaine in the proprieties of theyr nature. Which proprieties are the­se folowing whitnes, thicknes, breadeth, weight, tast, and power to norissh and feede the bodye, with such like, which he calleth the substance of bread and wy­ne, and more playnelie the properties of their nature. The lyke is to be answered vnto Theodoretus, whiche sayeth, that Christ honored the bread and wyne which we see, Theodor. Dial. 2. cō ­trahaereses with the names of his bodye aud bloud, not chainging the nature of them. (that is to saye, the naturall proprieties, because in all poyntes it appeereth vnto owr eye, to be euen as it was before consecration) but ioyning grace vnto that nature. Ouer and aboue all this, a most true and rea­die answer ys, that the faithfull doe con­sider allwayes, not, what one or two doe saye, but what the whole cumpanye of lerned men, or the greater part doe te­stifye. Agayn, before the church had ex­pressed it, and opened by her sentence, the manner of Christ his being in the Sacrament, it was no heresie (if proude obstinacie dyd not make it) to saye that [Page] bread remained, or that it vanished in to nothing. Bicause both opinions dyd hold with reall presence, and the authors of them were contented to yeld vnto their betters iudgement. And so, if we should graunt vnto the heret [...]kes, that which thei do require about Gelasius or Theo­doretus, they both defending the reall presence, it ys no small matter against the heretykes other opinions, and it ys no­thing at all against the Catholykes. But in these dares now, when it hath been de­creed according vnto scriptures, Concilium Lateranese and aun­cient fathers, in a generall councell, that the substance of bread is conuerted in to the bodie of Christ: now, to denie trans­substantiatiō, and to reuyle the decree of the Catholike church, this is greatlie a­gainst the faith. and this is it, which ma­keth heretikes. S. Cyprian, which defen­ded the rebaptizing of them, whom he­retykes had baptized before, was no he­retyke in so doing, bycause the question was not then determined by the church, vnto whose iudgement, he submitted his lerning and authoritie. But now, if it [Page 98] should come in to an idle head, to bring that blessed martyrs reasons, and to with­stand the Catholike church, he should do nothing els, in wyse mens iudgementes, but declare his owne vaine gloriouse fo­lie. And yet, I do not, ne will not vse this defence, but plainelie answer, that Gela­sius and Theodoretus, doe meane well, and speak as papistes may doe, that the substance or naturall propertie of bread remaineth, that is to saie, the same quan­titie, vertue and qualitie, which it had be­fore the cōsecration. Wherefor to con­clud the cleane contrarie, vnto Master Iuells assertion, I saie, that neither the auncient doctors do affirme, that the sub­stance of bread remaineth (vnderstan­ding by substance the essentiall and in­ternall forme or nature of bread) neither Duns and Durand doe saie, that if bread remain, there is daunger of Idolatrie.

Farther yet the scholemen say (quod M. M. Iuell. Iuell) that yf a man happen to worship the accidentes of bread? Idolatrie may be done to the sacrament: No good Syr; not to the sa­crament, but to the accid [...]ntes; wherein [Page] if fault shold be committed, it is not the fault of the institution of Christ, but of the silence of priestes, or simplicitie of the people. Neither is adoration therefor to be forbydden, but the manner of adora­tion is discretelie to be opened. whiles owr Sauior him selfe, walked visiblie v­pon the earthe, if one should haue wor­shipped his verie face or garment, not a­ble to distinct betweene the two natures of God and man, neither in what diuer­sitie and degree, the face and the garment appertein vnto one selfe same person, (whereas in truth, it were idolatrie to worship that face with godlie honor, in that respect and consideration as it is onlie an holie and graciouse visaige of a right ex­cellent and perfect man) bycause, herein may be daunger, should we not worship Ihesus Christ at all, or not worshipp hym before we vnderstand the distinction be­twene Latria and Dulia, that is, honor due and proper vnto God: and honor, which may be geauen vnto any holy [...] creature? O miserable people (sayeth ma­ster Iuell) that thus are lead to worshipp [Page 99] they know not what. For alas, how ma­nie of them, M. Iuells needles & folish pie­tie. vnderstand these distinctions, or care for them? How manie of them vn­derstand, after what sort accidentia be sine subiecto? &c. But o miserable world, saye I allso then, and alas alas, that any wyse man should be so taken, to thinke that what so euer ys concluded in scholes, should be opened in the pulpites.

Alas, alas, the churche doth teache open­lye, that the Father ys vnbegotten, the Soune onlye begotten, the Holye ghost proceding, and this who so euer doth not beleue, shall not be saued. O mise­serable people, that this are lead to bele­ue they know not what. For what know they, or what care haue they, of proceding or begetting? or how can they vnder­stand those misteries of the schole men? as for example, Christ toke the nature of man, he toke not the person of man, as cō ­cerning Christ his person, God died for man, as concerning the diuine nature, God can not die, and he which beleueth not those thinges shall neuer be saued. O miserable people, that this are l [...]d to [Page] beleue, thei know not what. for which of them vnderstandeth the distinction, be­twene substance and person? But what shall we saie? must the lerned men of the church (O master Iuell) beleue no more, then the people are able to conceiue? or bycause the people vnderstand not, what is accidēce, or what is substance, or what is quantitie, or qualitie, relation, or acti­on: is it therefor no matter, whether it be fysh or flesh, square or round, white or black, worldlie or euerlasting? for the [...], this is sufficient to beleue, that Christ is in the sacrament, vnder forme of bread and wyne, the bread b [...]ng chainged by his almightines, in to his bo [...]e, and the wyne, in to his bloud: or if some can not beare awaye all this, let hym cleane to the Catholyke faith, and hold vp his hands at sacring as others doe, and beleue more excellent thinges to be present, then hym selue can see or feele, and be content to be reformed, if perchaunse he should be in any error: and God will [...] aske hym (f [...]are yow non) what ys [...] ▪ or what is s [...]l [...]ctum, oh how is my body founded [Page 100] in the Sacrament. Now yet, if the plaines of faith doth best serue the simple man, shall the lerned be forbydden, to serch owt the vttermost of the misteries, and to meditate vpon the workes of God, praying and studying alwayes, for more knowledge and vnderstanding? By this kynd of reason, the studie of logyke and philosophie ys neglected, the pryd of the ignorant ys mainteyned, the commen­tes of auncient fathers are not folowed. And whyles master Iuell sheweth vnto the people, which can not iudge of diui­nitie, the true but subtile conclusions of the diuines and scholemen, and whiles he pytieth their case, because the schole doctors do talke of accidentia sine subiecto, and of substantia and accidens, which the common lay people can not vnderstand, and where as he would make them bele­ue▪ that according to the conclusions of the same scholemen, they shall neuer be saued, except thei credit and beleue those matters, they are made to abhor the scho­les as cruell, or to contemne them as su­p [...]ssuouse. Whe [...]as the truth ys, that if [Page] thei beleue in one some, all that which the church teaceth, allthowgh thei neuer aske for euerie part of it, and be not cu­riouse in thinges which passe their capa­citie, they yet be owt of all daunger. O pitiefull hart, Alas sayeth he, how manye of the people vnderstand these distinctions? whi Syr, no harme ys done, where it ys not re­quired, that thei should go to schole to lerne them, for geue me a faithfull man, which beleued verelie, Christ to be real­lie in the sacramēt, as the wordes of This ys my bodie, doe sound: and there shall need no teaching, that he kneele doune, or knock his breast, or call for grace, or behaue him selfe as it becummeth a crea­ture, in the presence of his maker. And such a one needeth not, to be talked with all, abowt accidens and subiectum or other such verityes and yet misteries. But when the priest sayeth vnto some one in the worlde, yow must beleue that Christ ys God, and that hys wordes be true, and that he sayed of bread, This is my bodye which shall be geuen for yow, which bodye, the Catholykes haue in the Sacrament [Page 101] yf a pedlar now, or pelting craftesman, would aske, how it is his body, and make furth straitewayes argumētes, which first were deuised in ale howses, or shoppes, and afterwardes receiued in some scholes, (as in example, Christ is ascended, ergo he is not in the Sacrament, or, can a priest make God? or, Argumen­tes of the ignorant people. can one body be in more places then one, at one tyme? or, yf a mowse eate the host doth he eate Christ his bodye?) in this case silence (I think) were best, & ecclesiastical correctiō for such a person were necessa­rie, so that to talke to hym of accidence and substance, it were cleane owt of the purpose. But now if a lerned mā, and ex­pert in liberall sciencies, were conuented perchaunce, and examined vpō the Sacra­ment of the altar, and if he would vse the coblers argumēt, and saye, Christ his [...]rue bodye is in one place, but the Sacrament is at one tyme in a thowsand churches togeather, ergo Christ is not in the Sacrament, here lo [...] were good occasiō, to perswade and pro­ue to hym the cōtrarie, bycause of the na­ture of a substāce, which occupieth no place, & so afterward to declare, that Christ [Page] is in the Sacrament, not as in a place [...] ­callie, but as vnder forme of bread sub­stantiallie, and that, by the turnyng of bread into hys bodye. Or, if an ethuyke being lerned, were to be conuerted vnto the faith, it ys for the honor of God and his church, to proue vnto the ethnyke, that althowgh the misterie of owr faith doe passe all reason, yet the principles of God his omnipotencye, and the incar­nation of Christ once beleued: they are so agreable vnto the high wisedome of God, that no absurditi [...] or shamefulnes shall euer be concluded of them. In the­se cases then, the distinctions doe serue, and in these occasions the church must not be to seek, of the fynest poyntes of all lernyng and misteries. In the serching of which, she hath labored from Christ his asconsiō hitherto, and dailie doth stu­die, the Holighost; the scholmaster, eue [...] teaching her more and more, and euer leauing her manye poyntes to be lerned, vntill she come at length vnto, heauen, where all trueth and veritie shall be most manifest and open. Wherfor the schole­men [Page 102] (as the worde it selfe doth import) are especiallie for scholes, and they are for lerned men, not for common pulpi­tes or merchantes eares, which as they be most riche of other, so they take them selues most wysest, and by a short waye, looke what they can not vnderstand, that are they readie to contempne. Now also, if the scholemen haue manye thinges not necessarie at all, it is no true part to make the cause of the church and them one. As M. Iuell here doth, which recy­ [...]yng Duns and Durand, and S. Thomas, and Alexander, and Holcott, would ma­ke men beleue, that the church can not tell what to doe, bicause in certain poin­tes and articles, these men varye the one from the other. Thinkyng perchaunse that as Lutherās must folow Luther, and the Zuinglians clea [...]e fast to Zuinglius: so that some sect of vs must folow Duns, some Alexander, and some S. Thomas.

Vnto which men yet, the Catholykes are not bownd, but as the church doth di­rect them. And where the church hath not de [...]iaed some matter, there may I [Page] holde one daye with one sense, an other day with a contrarie, leesing nothing of the integritye of my fayth. I perceaue, that ys any iust matter, myght be fownd owt against the church, it should be ex­aggerated, seyng that the pryuate opi­nions of certen, be turned to the defa­cing of the whole catholyke fayth.

Holcot sayeth, that it maye so chaunse, that one should meryte by the worshyp­ping of the dyuel, master, Iuell thinketh it vnpossible: Lett vs then suppose it, that master Holcot lyeth, the church (I trew) is not to be abhorred therfor, as thowgh she exhorted her childerne, some tymes to sett vp a candell before the dyuel. And yow also M. Iuell, yf yow would remem­bre, what difference there ys betwyxte a thing done materiallye and formallye (which termes the scholes know well inowgh) yow would neuer haue fownd such fault with Holcot, withowt shewing of the particular case, in which the wor­shypping of a wycked spyrite, myght be vnto some one meritoriouse, for in deed, yf one dyd know for certen, that Luther [Page 103] or anye of hys folowers, were a verye dyuel, in forme of a Doctor of the new Ghospel, yow should not (loued yow the setting furth of yowr procedinges neuer so well) geaue anye reuerence vnto hym: But if he seemeth vnto yow to be a third Helias, and a man of excellent preroga­tiue in knowledge of all trueth and ho­lines, were he a dyuel a thousand tymes, your brotherne would neuer condemne yow, for geuing of reuerence vnto hym. For when the owtward person ys mista­ken, and good wyll shewed vnto it: the error happening, ys quickelye forgeuen, and the inward affection ys iustlye con­sidered. But lett vs goe further.

These be his wordes. But I will tell yow Master Iuell, if yow will be ruled by counsel, and doe as wyse and lerned men haue done here before, neuer goe front your purpose, and make an end of that, which you haue taken in hand. And if any [Page] be importunate: answer them that yow will be at leisure an other tyme, and then talk at large of their obiectiōs. But now it ys owt of your purpose, to intreate of any thing which doth not appertein vnto the masse. But contention hath no eares, and when al is sett, in and vpon the tong, owt it must, that which burneth in the stomake, althowgh it agreeth no better then Germaines lippes, whose tongues we see, by experience in this world, how farr they sound one countrarye to the other. Lothe I am (sayeth he,) which is verye seldome in men of hys religion, which take it for a great perfection and zeale, not onlye to dallie with mens ar­gumentes, but also to deface their lyues, and to speake the worst they can of the highest priest in Christendom. But than­kes be vnto God, that there ys one sha­mefast man in their syde. And then good master Iuell, if in deed you be lothe (as you seeme to speake) lett all extraordi­narie matters passe by, and folow onlye your purpose. For why will you encum­ber your selfe with the highe misteries, [Page 104] misteries, and secretes of their lernyng, the masse alone hauing sufficient argu­ment, to make .20. Sermons vpon it?

Well, there ys no remedie: allthowgh he be lothe to open the secretes of owr lernyng, yet the importunitye of them (sayeth he) forceth me so to doe. Wher­in, althowghe I nothing doubt, but that he preached withowt troble, and that he myght haue done, what he would, and haue preached (in the lent especiallie) of the passion, or some matter parterning to pretie, withowt bringing of question, or controuersie: yet lett vs suppose, that some one was importunate, and lett vs harken how properlye master Iuell doth answer his appetite. But remember Sir, that yow keepe promys, least yow be thought to haue gone owt of your ware for nothing, and remember that yow ryp vp and open the high misteries and se­cretes of their lernyng, not skoffyng ly­ke a benchewhistler, but reasonyng lyke a preacher.

Fyrst then, M. Iuell. to begyn with the head, marke yow well (sayeth he) and waighe this ar­gument. [Page] God made two lightes in heauen, the greater to rule the daye, the lesse to rule the night, ergo there be two powers to rule the world, the Pope, that resembleth the sonn, and the Emperor, that is less then he, and likened vnto the moone. This is an argument of thei­res vsed by Innocentius tertius.

Syr, I pray yow, before Innocentius, who vsed this argument or conclusion? Then I aske, whether this text of Gene­sis, was the cause that the Pope should be greater then an Emperor? yf you can not tell what to answer to the first, you are not skillfull inowgh in owr misteries, how great also is your knowledge and reading, that before Innocentius tertius, yow dare well say, that no man euer vsed the same verie argument or similitude? And if to the second yow saye, that the Sonn and Moone were the cause, for which Christians dyd make the distin­ction betweene Pope and Emperor: you maye goe to schoole agayne, and lerne yowr Catechisme, for any knowledge or vnderstanding, which yow haue in se­cret mysteries, whereas before Innocen­tius [Page 105] dayes, the Pope was higher then the Emperor, the argument of the Sonn and Moone, being not alleaged for that pur­pose. Yf yow were Cicero, and for loue of your client, would make a pretie lye and me [...]ie, to delite my Lord the Iudge, and deceaue therewith his circunspection and grauitie: the Ethnykes, for your so doing, might dispense at their pleasure, with you, and geue that praise and name vnto you, that you be a trym felow, of a goodlie fyne witt and a pleasaunt, and such a one, good Iupiter, send me (might they say) at my need: but, emong Chri­stians, in so great a question as the sowle cummeth vnto, in open pulpitt, a famou­se scholar, a Bishopp by calling, to moue ernest expectation, as though he would rypp vp the high misteries of the Catho­like faith, and to recyte but an argument of Innocentius onlie, (which he rather for garnisshing of his letters, to the Em­peror, then strength of the similitude in it selfe and by it selfe, dyd roundelye alleage furth vnto hym,) and to make, as though that were the best argument, [Page] and most secret misterie, of the papiste [...] it ys not for a sage person, matter, place, or audience. Vnto yow M. Iuell, if one should talke of this question, how much the dignitie of a pope were better, then the rome of an Emperor, he should neuer alleage Innocentius tertius, or the glose. Not bycause, they are to be contempned in them selues, but rather bycause yow doe sett so litle by them. And yet, it may be proued vnto you, all that which Inno­centius would conclude, by the alluding vnto the sonn and moone, which God made at the beginnyng. Therefore I doe graunt vnto you, that Innocentius argu­ment ys not of great good force against an ethnyke and heretike, and yet I save, the cōclusion of the church standeth, for all that this argument may fall. But if it were an high misterie, it could not be so easelie lett to faile, ergo then yow haue declared or confuted yet, no misteries of owre religion.

Now, of the two rulers of Christ his church on earth. that there be two states of ruling in the church of Christ, it ys plaine by this, that the one which is temporall, euerye [Page 106] man doth see: of the other, which is spiri­tuall, the psalmist doth prophe [...]ie, saying, Psal. 44. in steede of my fathers, their [...]ounes are bor­ne vnto the (meanying the Apostles, and Bishoppes their successors) them shalt thow apoynte princes and rulers, ouer the whole earth. And this is proued also by the Apostle, commaunding the Bishoppes of Ephesus, to take heede vnto them selues, and also the whole flocke, in which the holy­ghost hath sett and made you Bishoppes, Act. 20. that yow should gouerne the churche of God, which he hath purchased by his blond. Then how much not only pope or prelate, The dig­nitie of preisthode. but euerie simple priest ys higher and hono­rabler, then the greatest Emperor of the world, not onlie the wordes and writin­ges of holie men, but their factes rather and behauyors, doe geue an euidon [...] testimonye. As S. Martin being inuited with much a doe vnto Maximus the Emperor his table, and hauing the cup first geauen vnto hym, that he should begin vnto the Emperor, not withstandyng the excea­ding great feast and honor, Sulpit. lib▪ 1. [...] which was he stowed vpon hym, by one of the cheifest [Page] then in the world: yet he, (to teach the Emperor a true lesson, and to proue that his maiestie ys not the highest) began aboue all other, vnto his chapelaine, de­claryng that he knew none there, to be better. Of lyke corage and fortitude was Eulogius an holye and constant priest, which being required of the Emperor Valens cheife officer, Trip. hist. li. 7. ca. 33. to communicate with hym, which helde the empyre and kyngdome (which, in owr English ton­gue at these day [...]s, ys to saye, Folowe the Kynges procedinges) answered peacea­blie and gentlelie, saying, And I also haue my part of a kyngdome and priesthode.

Such men were, Hist. tri. li. 7. ca. 3 [...] & li. 9. ca. 30. holye Basile, Ambrose, Chrysostome, noble and reuerend Bis­shoppes in deede, which litle regarding the glorie of the court and the worlde, spared not, to tell the Emperors, their owne, and also to shewe them that a Bisshopp his office, ys not geuen, with goldon crowne or purple. And not on­ly in theire doinges, the superi­ority of the [...] the Empe­rour. but in writinges also, they declared this veritie, that the Emperor, rul [...]th in the court; the Bis­shopp, [Page 107] in the church: the Emperor, o­uer mens goodes and bodyes, Ambros. de Sacer­dotio. Chrisost. libr. 3. de Sacerd. the Bis­shopp, ouer sowles and consciencies; the Emperor, in thinges transitorie: the Bis­shopp in thinges euerlasting.

These conclusions being therefore true, if Innocentius would sweetlye and mi­sticallye allude vnto the beginnyng of Genesis, and saye, that the two great lightes, which God made to rule the daye and nyght, doe signifie the two powers, of the spiritualtye and of the temporaltye, of whiche the one ys so brighter then the other, that the least of them both yet, doth direct and guide men in the whole worlde: is this so vnproper­lie spoken or childi [...]lie, that anye father of this generation, may honestlie con­tempne it? As, on the other syde, if there be no strength and force in this argumēt, is the highest misterie and secrete lerning of the catholikes, therby vttered and cōfuted? When frindes confer together fami­liarly, many thinges come and goe, to & fro betwixt them, which if they were exa­mined, by the seuere iudgemēt of some cō trollar, [Page] would seeme to be spoken trif­linglie. yet consider the tyme, place, and persons, they may stand wel inough with charitie, my meaning is this, when Chri­stians write vnto Christiās, in great peace of conscience, and silence of heresie, they are more bold with the Scriptures, allea­gi [...]g the textes of them▪ towardes their purpose, although it be not according to the first sense, and meanyng of the place. Alluding (as sweet S. Bernard doth man thousand places) vnto some histo­rie, verse, sentence, or other lyke thing in them, playeing, (as I might saye) and re­freshing them selues with the Scriptu­res, as [...]saac dyd play with the fayre Re­becca his wiffe in the garden of Abime­lech the kyng, secretlye, Gen. 26. as he thowght hym self, and honestlie, is a good and ver­tuous man, louinglie yet and familia [...]lye, as with a most true and bewtifull wi [...]e. All which thinges, [...] colerated [...]mong frendes, and they agree wel inowgh with cha [...] as long as they disagree not with honestie and veri [...]ie. But, when peekers of quarell [...] [...] [Page 108] doe appere, and heretikes begin to loure, then in deed, other kynd of writing and arguyng ys to be vsed, not to the vtter disalowing of the familiar manner and fashion (which hath his tyme and place,) but to prouyde against the cummyng in of strangers and enimyes, which seek on­lye how to fynd faultes with the Catho­likes. S. Paul wryting to the Corinthiās, emong other thinges, he willed, that wo­men should be couered in the churche, and emong other reasons, this was one, which he wrote verie sadlie: Doth not na­ture (sayeth he) teache yow this? 1. Cor. 11. for yow see, that long heare ys geauen vnto a womā, to couer herselfe withall. This now, in a Christian man his eares, doth sownd right well and probablie. But lett a quareller stand agaynst hym, and saye, my masters, Paul here hath wryten vnto yow, that your women should not be bare headed in the church. And why so? Loth I am, to ripp vp the secretes of his lernyng, and the force of his reasons. But his impor­tunitye dryueth me therevnto, marke ye therefore well, and waighe this argumēt. [Page] A woman, by nature hath long heare, er­go they must were byggins in the church. Should not such a skorner then, speak as right as master Iuell doth? alleaging that for a principall or singular argument, which in deed, is not so? and afterward, by disgracing of that argument, to bring the whole matter in to question, or els contempt? for the blessed Apostle vsed that reason, as in waye of persuasion, and as a probable and conuenient argument, which if one would denie, saying, it dyd not proue his purpose, his conclusion ys sure for all that, where he sayeth, in the end of that question. Yf any man seem to be contentiouse, 1. Cor. 11. we haue no such custome, nor the church of God. After which sort, it may be well answered, that if Innocentius did not therebye well proue, the superioritie of the pope aboue the Emperor, bicause the Sonn ys bigger then the moone, and if there were no other reasons of force and strength, emong the Catholykes, for that purpose, (as contrary wyse there be whole bokes of auncient doctors, which preferr priestes before all other, what so [Page 109] euer, creatures, for their order sake and authoritie) yet, Ambr. & Chrisost. de Sacerd. it might be well answe­red to heretykes, that, if yow be good and cunning at iesting and lyinge, vnder­stand ye, that we haue no such custome, neither the church of God. And so I answer not onlie for Innocentius, A generall answer for al the rea­sons of Glo­ses or doc­tors which M. luell iesteth at. but for Isidorus also, and Gerson, Bonifaci­us, the Glose, and for all others, which master Iuell rekoneth vp. That if they, ly­ke good men, abundyng in their sense, haue alleaged scripture, for prouing of those thinges, which were vsed before thei were borne, and if vnto contentiou­se persons, those good mens reasons are not sufficient, yet none should be so har­die, as to take awaye orders or articles, generallie of the whole church receiued. Bycause, it ys inowgh for a Christian man to alleage, that we haue no such custo­me, neither the church of God.

Wherefor as concernyng shauen crou­nes, and purple sandales, holye water, or praying in one tong, they were ne­uer taken for secrete mysteries in the church, and if the sentences of scripture, [Page] which holy men haue applied vnto them doe not abundantlie proue them good, there is no great harme taken. Of holye water. As for ho­lye water, althowgh that the wordes of the Prophet Ezechiel, may verie well be applied vnto it, where he sayeth: I will sprinkle vpon you cleane water (which wor­des being a prophecie of the baptisme of Christiās, Eze. ca. 36 I can not deuyse, in what parte of the seauen deadlie synnes it may be numbered, to speake them also by holye water, which in one signification, doth bring vs in remembrance of owr baptis­me) yet, graunting, that they make no more to the purpose, then master Iuells talke here of the supremacie, and purga­torie, and priestes crownes, and purple sandales, doe make against the Canon of the masse: holie water for all that, is not to be cast owt of the church, which was instituted by S. Alexander Bishop of Ro­me, and Martir of Christ, fowrtene hun­dred yeares agoe.

Then also, in the matters of weight, if that, Luc. 22. Ecce duo glagij hic [...] ▪ behold here are two swordes. Doth not proue the Bishopp of [Page 110] Rome his both spirituall and temporall power: The Pope hath both spirituall and tempes rall power euer all Christiās, althowgh [...]e vse not both, at all tymes. yet must yow not make hym an Antichrist, or the temporal princes page, and seruant. And if owr Sauyour would not vse in his humilitye the temporall sword and iurisdiction, yow will not ther­fore, I trust, denie, that he was Lord of Lordes and kyng of kynges. And so like­wise, he makyng his Apostle S. Peter his leuetenant, and ruler of all Christians, both sheepe and lambes: althowgh he put vpp his sword in to his sheath, yet doth it not folow, that he hath no such sword at all. For as concernyng the spirituall sword, no wyse heretike denyeth that vn­to the Bishop, the Scripture saying most plainely, whose synnes you forgeue, Matth. 18. they are forgeuen, whose synnes yow retaine, they be retained: But the temporall, if he will not vse it alwaies, yow may not therefor in all cases take it from hym. Whereas, for the cōmoditie of the whole church (if cause so requyre) he may as swell forbead, (con­cernyng the Emperors owne person,) that no man salute hym, or regarde hym, as he may excōmunicate the basest man [Page] in a whole citie, for a fault which deser­ueth it. which is true, in a Christian Em­peror, that hath submitted hym selfe by promyse vnto God, and the church: For of them which are withowt, 1. Cor. 5. what doth it ap­parteine vnto me, to iudge? doe not yow iud­ge of these which are within? Therefore, the temporall power, ys so included in the spirituall, as a lesse figure Mathe­maticall, of neuer so manie corners, ys compassed within a circle. It ys fynche sayed of Sainct Bernard, Bern lib. 4. de con­sideratione Lib. 4. de consi­deratione, where he speaketh of the tem­porall sword, which the Pope hath in his sheath: Ys this sword, (sayeth he) dyd per­teine vnto the by no right, when the Apost­les sayde, behold, here are two swordes: owr Lord would not haue answered, it is inowgh, but it ys to much. And therefor, both are the churches, I meane, the spirituall sword and the materiall. But the one, ys to be exercised for the church, the other, of the church: the one, with the priestes handes, the other with the souldiars. But yet trulie, at the beck of the priest, and bydding of the Emperor.

A, see now master Iuel, Low much Sainct [Page 111] Bernard made of that argument, which yow think worth the lawghing at. And this is that Bernard his testimonie, whom yow in pulpites, doe much bring furth agaynst the pompe and vyce of Rome, which as he was in deed, no flatterer at all, of the Bisshop of Rome, so much the more, yow should alowe his testimonye, which he hath browght furth, for the su­premicie. But, why should (Behold here are two swordes) more offend Christian eares, when one goeth abowt by all me­anes, for to proue and declare a veritie: then the argument of Sainct Paule doth, Gal. 4. where he vnto the Galathians (in dis­puting of the old law and prouing it to be voyde) telleth vs, that Abraham had two sounes, the one by his mayde seruant, the other by his wyfe, which (sayeth he) are the two testamentes. Agaynst which ar­gument, if master Iuell should vse one of his deepe and wittie confutations, and bydd the people marke, with, see I pray yow, what a worshipfull argumēt this ys, Abraham had two sounes, and the elder, plaied the boye with the younger, and [Page] the good wyfe Sara, awaye (quod she) with this old lubber, he shall not be heire with my child: ergo, the old law, must be thrust owt of dores: no doubt, but this would sound so vntuneablie, in the rude worldlie, or fyne courtlie eares of manie, that sone they might be brought vnto ir­religion, and contempt of the Apostles writinges.

Yow say well, of cummyng nearer, for hytherto you haue gone verie farr of, and verie farr wide. Yet, what bring yow a­gainst the fundation of the masse? I wō ­der at the libertie of the man. he maketh as thowgh he would ouerturne the mas­se, & he talketh of nothing, but of the La­tin tongue, the corporall of lynen, the al­tar of stone, the roūdnes of the bread, the mettle of the chalice, and such like thin­ges, which apperteine onlie to the com­lynes, and worship, and signification, of some good thing, about the ministring and consecrating of the sacrament. Are these the thinges which yow number, e­mong [Page 112] owr high misteries and secret ler­nyng? And which you were lothe to speake of, as thowgh there had ben some sha­mefull dishonestie in the matter? Or do yow call these thinges, the fundacions of the masse, vpon which it was builded? Are these the poyntes, by vttering of which, you haue gone abowte to procure vs sha­me? Grawnt vnto the Catholikes or pa­pistes, that which thei do bring in, by their high misteries, secret lernyng, and strēgth of their reasons. grawnt it, I beseech you good master Iuell, for a while, to see what will folowe? Trulie, no dishonor vnto God, no diminisshing of Christ his pas­sion, no occation of lewdnes, no breach of commaundement, no thing which a quiet man shold mislike. But these thin­ges will folow, which you were lothe to ripp vpp and open, that, in the celebra­tion, the chalice be of siluer or gold, that priestes wassh their handes in the masse. that the clothes be of fyne lynen, that the priest lift vp the paten, and loke in to the chalice, as the angell did in to the graue, that the priest fetch a sigth, in a [Page] certaine place of the Canon of the mas­se, and knock his breast, with remem­brance of the theife which repented hym selfe of his wicked lyfe, with such lyke moe, which may and doe bring manye meanely disposed, in to the remembrance of sundrie poyntes of Christ his passion. O heauen and earth: what faultes be these? How much ys master Iuell to be estemed, for rippyng and opening of such priuie misteries, which once being knowen, no man woulde euer loue the masse any more I trowe? It ys wonder that Sainct Pawles church and steple we­re not stroken with lightning from hea­uen, when the fierst masse was sayed within it, in which masse, such absurdi­ties as the preacher telleth vs of, were permitted. O excellent Iuell, thow hast not thy name for nawght. This daye, thow hast confounded all papistes, this daye, thow hast so ripped theire copes, and opened their bosomes, and Englis­shed vnto vs their obseruations and ru­brikes, that they must nedes be ashamed for euer. O the lyuing Lorde (will the [Page 113] folissh saye) how haue we ben seduced of the papistes? how much were they them selues heauie loden with mennes traditions? and how litle vertue was in all their doinges, if a man should take awaie, the number of popis [...]h ceremo­nies?

But alas for pitie, and phy for shame. A lerned man and browght vp emong honest studies, so for to abuse the ig­norance of the vnlerned and vnstedfast people, that they should think, nothing els, to be in the sacrifice and oblation of the Catholikes, but an obseruation of a strange tong, lynen cloth, altar of sto­ne, chalice of gold, or other such mat­ters? Although I would not suffer a su­spect person, to cutt my heare, and would not trust hym with paring of my nai­les, and no man (that wyse is) permitteth his enemie to doe with the makyng of his apparell, or the prescribyng of a diete and order vnto hym: yet the life it selfe, ys an other thing, then heare, nayle, ap­parell, or diete, and the heretike hath not to meddle, with the behauyors and cere­monies [Page] of Catholikes, althowgh the life of owr sowle consisteth not in them: but in the holie and relieuing Sacramentes. What should we doe, by M. Iuells pryuie and wise counsell? if we did putt awaie, for his pleasur, the ceremonies, which of­fend his ghostlie spirite: should we haue nothing to putt the bread and wyne vpō, that he findeth so great fault with an al­tar? surelie, what so euer matter, the al­tar had ben made of, good men would haue sone applied, some one text, or o­ther to that purpose. He hath a spite a­gainst the golden chalice: shold we drink then without a cupp? what so euer me­tall, the chalice had ben made of, great scholars would haue shewed, some place or other, seruing for it. And no doubt, the thinges them selues were first vsed, for some good cause and reason, not expres­sed in writing perchaunse, but left in tra­dition, which being not alwaies knowen and manifest vnto all lerned men: they, vpon the confidence of the trueth, and holines which is in the churche, and also vpon this principle, that nothing is to be [Page 114] condempned which serueth vnto chari­tie: The traditions and ceremo­nies of the church, a­re to be re­ceiued and continued withowt reason al­leaged. added a probable and likelie reason, which shold make for the ceremonie re­ceiued. And whereas, without any reason alleaged, euery tradition ys to be conti­nued: why should it be so much the wor­ser, bycause a reason is inuented for it?

There ys no principall part of a man, of whose fasshion, situation, or manner, the philosophers did not, either geue the rea­son, or seek after it, at the lest. As, why the eyes, be placed on high? why there be two of them, one tong seruyng vs? why the fingers be so manye? why the thum­be so thick and short? why the braine so colde, sett in the head? why the hart so hott, placed in the middle? and so fu [...]the in the rest. Yet, I am sure, they stode not by God, when he made the world, that bycause of the Ergo, which they had concluded, God should make that part of his creature, which should agree with their reason. As (in example) the hart [...] hott, and some colde thing must be in­uented, to asswage the feruentnes of it, ergo sett the colde braine directlie ouer [Page] it: I thinke not, that any man dyd at the begynnyng make this reason, and that therefore God dyd answer hym, with, yow say well gentle philosopher, it shall be so, as yowr ergo concludeth. But God, most wyselie and agreablie, hath sett euerye part of vs in his order. of which has doing, there be causes, and reasons, more then any man can t [...]ll. v­pon the inventing and serching of which he hath sett those occupyed, which will studie naturall philosophie, and consider the workes of wysedome. Not so yett, that when any man, hath geauen a pro­per and probable cause, of the makyng or disponing of any creature: that cause which the man inventeth, should be termed the occasion and cause of that creature. But this doth folowe, that God ys a wonderfull wysedome, which (all­thowgh no man should fynd fault with his doinges, but take them as he hath apoynted) hath prouided yet, that such good reason, should be seen in all his workinges: that he must be, not onlie stub­burne, but also folish, which would stri­ue [Page 115] and murmur against them.

And so I think, for the ceremonies of all kindes which are vsed in the church, of which a great number haue come from the verie Apostles, and the rest ha­ue ben apoynted, by them which had A­postolike authoritye. These ceremonies then, once receyued of the Catholykes were kept of them for obedience sake, which knew not the reason and occasion of them. Then loe, the lerned men, Of the an­tiquitie authoritie & causes of the ceremonies of the catholike church. hauyng good iudgemente and leisure, and knowing that nothing hath ben ras­shelye alowed in the vniuersall Church of the Catholikes: eyther receyued or inuented (as God should putt in their mindes) a probable cause of the churches ceremonyes and traditions, and the pos­teritye also woulde perchaunse, increase theyr forefathers godlye inuentions, so that at this day, of one ceremonie of the churche, yow may haue three or fower deuoute causes, wherin we must not ma­ke folysh argumentes, of this sayeth Du­rand, ergo this was the verye fundation, of the ceremonie.

[Page] And now, lett euerie man so worke abowt the reason of it, as he may gather most vantage and profitt, to the sturring vpp, The cause and institu­tion of the whyte ly­nen corpo­rall. of his deuotion. Christ was buried in a shroude of lynen cloth, ergo the corporall must be made of fine lynen. This argument may be found in Siluester, quod master Iuell. Ergo before this argument, and before the tyme of Siluester, was not the corpo­rall of lynen? Beds. in cap. 25. Mar [...]. yeas, S. Bede an auncient father, testifieth, that holie Sixtus long before his tyme, did make that order, that the sacrifice of the altar should not be exequated, neither on silk, neither on co­lored cloth, but cleane white lynen onlie. Againe, Hi [...]re. 51. Babilon ys a cupp of Gold in my hand, saieth the Lord, ergo the chalice must be of siluer or gold. This reason master Iu­ell testeth at, Of the an­tiquitie of [...] in the church as the argument of master William Durand. But, were chalices of gold neuer vsed, before Durant made that reason, or application? yeas, Prudē ­tius aboue .xij. hundred yeares past, Prudent, de [...]. spea­keth expreshe of golden chalices, which the Emperor would haue takē from the Christians. VVhen Virgill sayeth, Cum fa­ciam [Page 116] vitula, he vsed facere for sacrificare, ergo hoc facite in me [...] memoriā, Iuell. ys meant, sacrifice this in remembrance of me. May we thank Virgil then, for owr sacrifice? And except that verse had ben espyed, would there haue ben no priesthode at all, or proper sacrifices of the Christians? And yet, in the verie scriptures themselues, fa­cere ys vsed for sacrificare. 13. Iud. as in the .xiij. Chapiter of Iudges, I beseche the (sayeth Manue to the Angell) that thow willt yel­de to my requestes, & faciamus tibi hoedum de capris, and that we may offer vpp vnto the a kydd of the gotes. But what neede I, to speake further in this matter? The truth ys verie plaine, that the thinges themselues were vsed, before the reasons of Siluester and Durand were alleaged.

And therefore, it is a plaine lye to imagin that their reasons were the fundations of our ceremonies and orders, as who should saye, before Durand and Siluesters dayes, thei were neuer invented. And therefore once to make an end of this place, these nice felowes, which hauing no religion yet of their owne, haue idlenes and licē ­tiousnes [Page] inowgh, to find fault with o­thers pietie: they may be well compared to the wanton dame Michol, which loo­kyng owt at a window, vpon the kyng Dauid her husband, and mislyking much his daunsing before the arke of God all­mightie, 2. Reg. 6. O (quod she tauntinglie) how worshippfull was my Lord this daye, disco­vering hym selfe before his handmaydens? 1. Paralip. 15. And (sayeth the scripture) she dispised hym in her hart, by likelihode bycause he had a white lynen cloth, as rochett or surplesse vpon his backe, like a priest. And so the­se now, from the windowe of their high contemplation, or despection rather of other, when they behold good and blessed men, to daunce before the arke of God, and to make in their turninges and re­turnynges, the scriptures pleasantlie to allude vnto the ornamentes of the sacri­fice, and the true manna, which is the bo­die of Christ, Are not heretikes, wantō and baren Mi­chols, or dawghters of Saul. and perchaunse thorough libertie of spirite, & excesse of ioye, shew a litle their bare, O, saye these daughters of Saul, what goodlie doctors are these, and how cleane is their religion? See, [Page 117] what golden cuppes, and altars of stone, and fyne lynen clothes, and rowndnes of hostes, and wasshinges of hādes, and sigh­thinges of hart, and what reasons thei ha­ue? Behold, the Sonn and the Moone doe rule daie and night: and againe, two swordes be here, ergo the Pope ys better then an Emperor, and may sitt iudge o­uer spirituall and temporall matters.

How gloriouse loe (say thei) be these young fathers and lordes of the church? But what sayeth the trueth for Catholi­kes? Marye, bycawse God hath chosen vs, to be rulers of his church, and hath pre­ferred vs before the stowtnes of the Pro­testantes, and bycause in owr arke and church the law and the Ghospell ys con­teyned, with the authoritie to correct mis­creantes, which is the rodd of Aaron, and the pott of heauenlie Manna, which ys the bodie of owr Sauyor: therefor, if owr discouering of owr selues doth greene yow: we will not onlie, not be ashamed of the applications of scriptures, which we haue vsed, but we will hereafter be more studiouse, in reading, in vsing, in expown­ding [Page] [...] [Page 117] [...] [Page] of the scriptures, that no historie, prophecie, battell, name of person, place, or countrye, no hill, floud field, nothing at all, shall escape vs, but we will bring it vnto some good sense, allegoricall, mo­rall, or analogicall: we all knowe, that Theologia mysti [...]a non est argumentis apta, and that the sense misticall, ys not of sure strength in reasonyng. but owr arke be­ing sure, and the growndes of owr reli­gion being well setteled, and owt of dawnger: for the rest, we maye sing and plaie, and be ioyfull, and harpe vpon the scri­pture. In vsing of which if a curiouse [...], shal see vs discouered, or in part, naked: it is not owr thowght, whether all thinges sitt abowt vs so well and fynelie, that he­retikes and quarellers doe not or can not carp at vs, but that the arke of God, be safelie conducted in to Syon, and placed within Hierusalem. And if this text of the old law, ( Thow shallt not bynd vpp the mowth of thi oxe which treadeth owr thi cor­ne. 1. Cor. 9.) doth not proue, that thei, which la­bor in seruyng the altar, must lyue by the altar: yet as long as church, altar, priestho­de, [Page 118] sacrifice, and such other thinges of weight remaine, we will not stryue vpon the misticall sense of euerie chapiter in the law whether it proueth owr conclu­sion, that which we think worth the alo­wing. These wordes (as I trust) are rea­sonable, and this ys the plaine trueth of the matter. Not to make more ieopardie, then the church requyreth, neither to fai­ne vpon the Catholikes, as that, if a Car­dinall tredd a wrie vpon his purple san­dales, or the priest at the altar remember not the theife which hanged on the crosse by Christ, and sigth at the remembrance thereof; that all owr religion ys quyte o­uerturned. And this much hitherto, for the answering of that common place of M. Iuells, where he thowght by gathering of certaine absurd argumētes (if the peo­ple be iudge) and by lowd and bold cry­ing owt, that these were the secrete misteries of owr religion, and that loth he was to rip them vp, he thought to bring owr whole religion, in to contempt and ob­loquie. And now lett vs consider his last matter, which he promysed to touche.

But, what calleth M. Iuell a priuate masse? He craketh much of the primi­tiue church, as who should saye, all anti­quity were with them. And oftentymes, he asketh the question, where we can fynd a priuate masse? and will not heare vs answer, that we vpholde no priuate masse, and that this terme of (priuate,) hath ben inuented, but of the heretikes them selues. For the masse in deede, is a common function and office, to be done of a priest, which is the legate of the peo­ple vnto God: and God his messenger vnto them, In which offices, he speaketh for their necessities, bringyng vnto God, the most noble & ryche present of Christ his owne body, the soner to obteyne mer­cy and grace at the which, not onlye the visible parties present, but all Angels and blessed sowles, either in heauen, or in the way thytherward, be assistants, and doe ac­company the priest. If .20. men be stan­dyng by, is it common: and if thousandes [Page 119] of heauenly hostes, replenysh the place .19. of the men lackyng, is it priuate? yf it be sayd in the open church, is it com­mon, and yf it be browght vnto a litle chappell, is it priuate? what meaneth he by this word priuate, I would fayne vn­derstand? And they answer, that, when one alone receiueth, what the Protestan­tes meane by priuate masse. then it is priuate. But is that all their reason? why then, yf the matter hangeth vpon the nomber of the communicantes, we shall haue as ma­ny diuisions of common masse, as they haue prety definitions of a priuate masse. Three (sayeth the order of the commu­nion boke) myndyng to receaue, do ma­ke a cōmunion, as three make a colledge, (as I haue heard) with the lawiers, but one alone maynteyneth it a colledge, by the selfesame lawiers, ergo that masse is not priuate, but common. and yet com­mon of the least, because,) yf one lacked, there could be no cōmunion. well then, yf three skore will cōmunicate, the nom­bre encreasyng, the state of the masse, is altered, and therfore let this be called a masse of the common of the more. Now, [Page] yf yow make vp three hundred, that must nedes be, a cōmon of the greater. yf three thousand, a cōmon of the more greater: so that we shall haue no end, of cōmon of the more, and common of the lesse. How much more better is it proued, e­uery masse to be equally cōmon, because the priest is a cōmon officer, the prayers be common, the answerer in the peoples behalfe common, the church hath no priuate Masse but euerie one ys common. the thing offered cō ­mon, the table common, the thankes ge­uyng is common, and as it was in the A­postelles tymes, all, in that mistery, is cō ­mon. And these so many common thin­ges, shall one peltyng reason take away, bycawse the priest alone receiueth? And shall the lothsomnes to heauenly thinges, in the people, cawse that, to be priuate, which of his owne nature, is and [...] no otherwise, then cōmon? Let som cer­tayne Bisshopp of good will and charity, cause bei [...]es and muttons to be kylled, and all thinges prepared, for open howse­hold, his entent beyng knowen, and the tables spread, the vssher with lowd voyce prouoking men to sytt downe, yf none [Page 120] will vse the liberalitye of the good prela­te, maye we frelye tawnt at hym, and say, he kepeth no howse at all, or els but a priuate table? Yf a fayre common, lye ioyening vnto a citye, and by common agreement, the cattle be lett to entre in, but three distinct monethes in the yere: in all the rest of the nyne monethes, we­re it wisely reported, to say, this ys pri­uate? So may one call the seas priuate, where no man doth trauell, and the wil­dernes priuate, where no mā inhabiteth, and the sonn priuate, yf none could co­me into him, and Christes very death pri­uate, yf all would be infidells. I or did e­uer any p [...]est, forhead the lay people, that they should not come to communicate? are not the church dores open? may not the priest, be spoken with all? ys not the necessary matter for the Sacrament, of lyght charge? hath not the church com­maunded vpon the payne of synn, once at the least to receaue euery yere, because someels would neuer com to that table? wherby she declareth her sorow, that ma­ny are so rechelesse in matter of their sal­uation, [Page] and how glad she would be, to haue no occasyon of continuing her de­cree? And the Sacrament lying so open, for euery man and woman, and the priest so ready, and the seruice of the masse so daylye, must it, (on Luthers name,) be called pryuate, because none will cōmu­nicate? Or, is the meate on the table, and the gestes at the table, all one? and if the gestes depart, will the disshes aryse with them? and ys the people be singular, must the masse be pryuate? well, yet lightely then, vpon Easter day in parish churches, there are no priuate masses, and so those masses be owte of yowr reache Master Iuell. Then put this case, that at one priestes masse, there were som receauers, at a [...]nothers none at all, both priestes v­sing one boke and seruice, yf he which sayeth the priuate masse, (as yow terme it) doe naught, how do yow excuse hym, withwhom some communicate? or yf his masse be good, which hath certen to re­ceiue with hym, why shall the others be reproued, which althowght he receyue alone, yet he sayeth no more nor lesse, [Page 121] then his felow doth? In my mind, it ys owt of reason and purpose, to fynd fault with the masse, because of them which here the masse and for the slowth of the people, to disproue the diligence of the priest, and bicause of vnwillingnes in men, to distroye the mysteries and pleasure of God. But now, M. Iuel, lest he shold seme to speke withowt authoritye, he recko­neth vp, the institutiō of Christ, the order which S. Paul receiuyd, the practyse of the primitiue church for the space of six hū ­dred yeares. And what will you proue by all this? Mary (sayeth he) that at those daies, there was a communion. Well we doe graunt that in the beginnyng, the people receiued with the priestes. But what do yow inferr of that? ergo there was no priuate masse, and the priest did neuer receiue alone. I deny your argumēt For these two thinges: the people to re­ceiue with the priest, and a priest yet to receiue alone, be not contrary, but that at these dayes, they may be both verifyed in one church at an Easter tyme. But I will not be so hasty with yow: & I graunt [Page] that at the begynning the people did cō ­municate daylye ergo the priuate masse is naught. Well Syr, yf this be the fault, [...]t shalbe amended with me, and I will ne­uer say masse hereafter, but some shal cō ­municate with me doth this please you? and is the masse, which I say, in this case allowable or no? I know what yow must say (yf yow folow your masters), that it is not allowable. Truly then I may well co­me within yow. For yf the hauing of cō ­municantes at my masse, doe not make the thing perfect: neither the lacke of them shall make it vnperfect▪ what is the masse the better, yf three receyue with me? No iote sayeth the heretik▪ what is it the wo [...]ser, yf none will communicate? In no poynt, he should answer. so that to haue or lack communicantes, is but an accidēt vnto it, and may be absent either present, beside the corruption of the sub­iect. Therfor, yf yow could proue, that S. Clement, S. Denys, S. Iustyne, and the rest, did vse a contrary masse vnto owres, yow should saye sumwhat, but now, yow troble your self, with prouing, that many [Page 122] did receiue with the priest, in the primi­tiue church (which no man denieth) and yow inferr thervpon slenderly, that pri­uate masse was not then vsed▪ which no­thing auayleth. for more or lesse, all or none, to receiue at a masse, it maketh so litle difference, that as owr masse is no­thing the better (as yow will saye) yf all present by, should receiue: in so by the li­ke conclusion, it ys nothing the worse, if none doe cōmunicate. And as the good­nes or naughtines of the priest, doth no­thing profit or hinder the mysteries in themselues: so much lesse, the comming or the goyng of the people, can with­stand the effect of God his word and wil. Now yet, althowgh I haue not to deny the testimonies of the fathers, which in this part are alleaged, which are not vn­knowen vnto Catholikes, and are regar­ded of them: that not withstanding, I wil loke vpon them, and consider their faces, most graue in the syght of Catholikes, but not so with the Protestantes, which some tymes geue reuerēt and humble lo­kes vp towardes them, and at other ty­mes [Page] with scoffes and disdaynes inowgh, they passe lightly by them.

Behold now, The inconstantie and uncertentie of hereti­kes. how much ys made of S. Clement? whom ower Iuell putteth in the first place, but at another tyme, how much he will regard hym? it appeareth manifestly by the prayse which he geueth to hym, saying (who, as they saye, was S. Peters scholar) I am content now. As who should say, that Clement stand for S. Pe­ters scholar, but this I speake, not vpon myne owne thinkyng so, but (as they say.) For yf I be vrged with any testimonye of that epistle of his, vnto S. Iames (as it hath many popissh thinges in it) I will answer, that I know not what felow this Clement was, but as they say, he was S. Peters scholar. And what then say yow of hym, M. Iuell. yf a man should aske yow? Then foloweth S. Dionisius, an auncyent writer, and, as some haue thowght, Disciple vnto S. Paule, although the contrary may appeare, by his owne wordes. well yet, lett it be mar­ked that Master Iuell confesseth him to be an auncient wryter, for a certen pur­pose, when we shall proue many thinges [Page 123] to lack in the late setting vp of this new religiō, which were vsed in the primitiue church, as frankin [...]ense, oyle, salt, syngyng, crossyng, handes wasshyng, and suche like, which Sainct Denys reckoneth vpp.

In the third place S. Iustine is allea­ged, but to the shame of the cōmunion in English▪ because S. Iustine maketh mention of wine and water both, the English order hauing wine only without water. And agayne, yf any were absent, in S. Iustines dayes, the sacrament was caryed home to them, which, according to the expresse forme of the Ghospell, and S. Paule, should (as these men report) be re­ceiued, not alone at home, but in the cō ­gregation, togeathers with other.

After him, S. Ambrose, S. Hierome, S. Au­gustine, S. Leo, are browght in, to proue that, which catholikes euer confessed of, that in the primitiue church the people did communicate with the priest, with which thing it myght stand well inowgh, that the priest did his office, although the people would somtymes not communi­cate: for of the dayly sacrifice, and recea­uing [Page] of the priest, vsed in the old church, S. Chrisostome sayeth in the .24 homel [...], vpon the first vnto the Corinthians: Doe we not offer dayly? yes we do offer, Chris. ho­mil. 24. ad 1. Cor. but ther­by we make a remembrance of his death.

But of the slacknes of the people, S. Ambrose sayth: It is a daily bread, why doest thow receiue it, Ambr. lib. 6. de Sac. cap. 4. after a yere, as the Grecian [...] are accustomed to doe? So that, yf the priest should tary for the people, and they would not receyue, and if he could not consecrate, and doe his office, except some would cōmunicate, then had they in Grece, in some partes thereof, but one communion through the whole yeare, which is to absurd and vnreasonable, and also against S. Chrisostome, Chrisost. ad Ephes. hom [...]l. 3. ad Eph. ho. 3. where he maketh expresse mention of frequent and oft rece [...]uyng. But now see what a reason he bringeth agaynst vs? euen by the very masse, which is at this daye vsed, he proueth, that priuate masse was neuer practised. Because the prayers and blessinges, and actions of owr masse, do apparteyne to the plurall number, and therfore vnto a communion, and not to [Page 124] the priuate masse. Which thing, being grawnted, it will folowe then, that the forme of the masse is very auncyent, and made within .v [...]C. yeares of Christ, af­ter which tyme, priuate masse came in place, as they seeme to say. For reason doth geue, that vnto a priuate masse the rulers of the church, would not haue ge­uen a common forme, ergo this masse, which at these dayes is vsed, which soun­deth of a cōmunion, was before the pri­uate masse, ergo it is verie auncient, ergo it should not be so much taunted at, as M. Iuell hath done, in the begynnynge of his Sermon. And further it doth ap­pere, that the masse hath no lacke in it self, as the which agreeth in sence and wordes, for more then one to receiue at it: but only the fault is, in the people, which will not conforme them selfes, vn­to the order of the masse. Chrisost. ho. 3. ad Ephesiot. Astat mēsa regia, ad­su [...]t Ang [...] li mensae huius mi­nistri. And yet I say further, that the wordes of Oremus let vs pray, and orate pro me, pray for me, be truely sayed, when the priest alone recei­ueth, bycause more are present at ouery mass [...], then any bodelie ey [...] can see. And [Page] also, because the priest ys not a priuate person when he is at the alter, but a com­mon officer of the whole church, whose presence is allwayes vnderstanded, to be at the office of the masse, euen as she is present at the baptising of children, yf neither god father nor god mother, nei­ther mydwife, neither parish clark, were within he [...]ng, but only the young infant which hath no discretion, and the priest (or som other in tyme of necessitye) to baptise the child, in the name of the fa­ther the soune and the holyghost.

Now after all this, he allegeageth the Ca­nons of the Apostles, a decree of Cal [...]x­tus, the Dialog of S. Gregorie. O Lord God, what faces haue these men? They know in their owne ha [...]es, that the Ca­nons of the Apostles, and the Dialoges of S. Gregory, make so much agaynst them, that they are constrayned to repell them both, and priuely (by your leaue) to laugh at S. Gregory. And yet now, see what a good countinance they beare towardes them? But all that, which any of thes [...]ore named witnesses do conclud, is, that in [Page 125] the primitiue church the people dyd cō ­municate, or, when they were slack and tardye, the good Byshoppes dyd make them, to hasten them selues, with these wordes and like, Gregor. in dial. Chri­sost. ho. 3. ad Ephesos except yow communicate, depart yow hence, yf yow be not ready, and worthy to receiue, yow be not worthy to be present &c. But when charitye, for all the good mens exhortatiōs, daylie decreased, and for all their sainges, that Chri­stia people should oft receiue. whē very few did receiue, should the dayly sacrifice fayle? shold the order of Melchisedech haue his end? should there be no priesthode any more, because the people did not cōmu­c [...]te? The rulers of Christ his church, did exhort and wish, that men would receiue dayly, which when they could not obtain, they cōmaunded, that yet at the least, eue­ry sonday they should cōmunicate, which after a space being greuous vnto many, they brougth it vnto .3. principall feastes of the yere, Christmas, Easter, and Whit­sontyde. And those .3. at length seming to many in England (for in other countries they keepe them, Fabian [...] Papa. and more to, vnto this day) it was last of al enacted by the church [Page] that he which would not receiue at Ea­ster, Inno [...]tius 3 Extra. de p [...]e. & re­miss. [...]a. Omnis. hauing no necessary impediment, should not be accompted for a Christiā. And should we in this wicked world, ha­ue no oblation or seruice, betwixt Easter, and Easter, yf in all that space, none but priestes by them selves would receaue? Allso doth any wise man iudge it neces­sary, that in these dayes all orders be ap­pointed, vpon the payne of deadly synne, which were in the primitiue church vsed? At those dayes, by the .10 Canon of the Aposteles, he which had not taryed at the prayers, vntill the end of masse, and recei­ued the holy cōmunion, was suspended therefor. But now, the best of euery pa­rish doth come and goe at his pleasure, and receiueth but thrise in the whole yea­re, to fulfill the act of parliament, and is quyte owt of dawnger of so great a pu­nishment as suspension is to be compted. By S. Gregory his dialoges, he should de­part, which did not communicate, and now they which receaue not, doe tary [...] in yowr church withowt fault, vntil their turne of receauing commeth. At those [Page 126] dayes Catecumenes in the faith, Chrisost. & Basiliu [...] in suis Li­turg [...]s. and the penitentes were cōmaunded to go furth, and now euen those which are of a con­trary religion, are compelled to come in. Therfor the heades of the church, haue euer wrought wysely, easyng the rigor of their statutes, as it should be best, for the [...]difying, and not destroying of the peo­ple. Glad to receiue them euery day [...], if that euery day they would come. Glad to receiue them on sondayes, & if not th [...]n, yet thrise a yere, once at the least: or yf the people would neuer come, shall their in­credulitie make voyde the truth of God?

And maye not a priest enter in to the most holy places of Sancta Sanctorum, ex­c [...]pt the whole parish goe in together with hym? Therfore, grawnting that in the primity [...]e church, (when all Chri­stians lyued so honestly in their common behauior, as a few doe liue in these dayes in the monasteries) they receiued dayli [...], throwgh the seruentnes of ther charitie: it standeth yet, with good reason, that if none receiue now with the priest, the ser­uice and sacrified which was in the pri­mitiue [Page] church, should neuer the lesse continew. because the not receiuyng, is im­putable vnto the fault of the people, but the order of seruice and sacrifice, hath been receiued of Christ, the Apostles, and their successors. And so M. Iuell yow nede not, to cry owt, with O Gregory, O Augustine, Iuell. O Ierome, O Chrisostome, O Leo, O Dionisie, O Anacletus, O Sixtus, O Paul, O Christ. as though they haue deceiued yow, and tawght yow schismes and d [...] ­sions, for yow saye, if the people receiue not, ther can be no masse at all: and the fornamed saye, according to the state of their tyme, that yf the people wil not re­ceiue, they depart and geue place. To de­nye obstinathe, that yf a priest say masse, and receiue alone, it may be auayleable, that is an heresie. to exhort and persuade, that the people prepare them selues, to receiue daylie, that is the doctors saying, and here vnto agree the Catholikes.

And now, we are come to the place, whe­re the preacher doth most dilate hym sel­fe, with crakyng and lying, with prouo­king of others, and enforcyng hym self, [Page 127] so abundanthe, that one would loke, that he should bring sumwhat. Yet, he talketh so cōfusely, that I can not tel, wherwith to begyn, som thinges, which he asketh, de­seruing no answer, other thinges, which he denyeth, requiring whole treatises.

Loe, one wold think, that the Catho­likes did maynteyn, a certen thing called a priuate masse, in despyte and contempt of the layetie. And that this priuate mas­se, were such a thing, as maketh or mar­reth owr religion for euer, for which yet, we can alleage, no Scripture, no example, no councell, no doctor, no auncyent fa­ther. But shal I answer breifly? the church of Christ, hath and knoweth no priuate masse, and therfor to what purpose is it to requyre that she should proue it?

[Page] And although, some masses are sayed in the mornyng, the church acknow­ledgeth no priuate masse. some before the King and his Cownsell, other before the cōmons, some where none will receiue, other whe­re a few are prepared therunto: yet the masse is not diuided, among them which haue lernyng, into mornyng masse and hygh masse, or royall masse and low mas­se, or common masse, and priuate masse, as it were, the proper distinct kyndes of masse: or as herit [...]kes may be essentiallye diuided, into Lutherans, Zuinglians, A­nabaptistes, and such like. But, as there is but one naturall Soon of God, Ihesus Christ, which toke flessh for mankynde, and one oblation was offered by him on­ce for all: so there is but that one obla­tion, which still contineweth, and but o­ne masse. ‘Further▪ now, Iuell. yf any lerned man, of all owr aduersaries, or yf all the lerned men that be alyue, be able to bring any one sufficient sentence owt of any olde Catholike doctor, or father, or general Coūcell, or holye Scriptures, or any one example of the primitiue church.’ The sentence is very long: the conclu­sion is, that yf we can bring any proufe [Page 128] agaynst them, in a nombre of articles, which he recyteth, then will he yelde and subscribe vnto vs. A Godes name then, what shall we proue? Eyrst, (quod he) that there was any priuate masse, in the who­le world, at that tyme. No, there was none then, neither is there any now, emong the Catholikes. Or that there was any commu­nion ministred vnto the people vnder one kinde. Vnto this, what yf I should answer no: and say, that .vjC. yeres after Christ, the people receiued vnder both ki [...]des: owr Catholike fayth, is in no dawnger therby, and we are not rebells, or traytors, to the ordenance of owr Sauior, and the primitiue church. For in a matter indif­ferent, the church may folow what part shall please her, and this receiuing in one or both kyndes, is indifferent, as concer­ning the layetie: and this is so playne, that owr aduersa [...]es doe cōfesse it. The right third Elias, R [...]ceiuing vnder both ky [...]des is a thing indiffer [...]ent concerning th [...] laitie. and restorer of the Ghospell, M.D. Luther in a boke of his vnto the Bohemians, Bycause in deed (sayth he) it were goodlye, to vse both kindes, and Christ hath commaunded in this poynt, nothing as neces­sary, [Page] it were better, to folow peace and vnitie, then to striue vpon the formes and kindes of receiuyng the sacrament. Thus first thē, could I answer safely inowgh, Receyuing vnder one kynd, [...] ­wed in the primitiue church. but I will take an other way, and proue by good auctoritie of fathers, & examples of antiquitie, that within .vjC. yeares after Christ, the sacra­mēt was receiued vnder one kynd. Christ owr Sauior, Luc. 24. toke bread, brake it, and gaue it vnto the two disciples, with whom he turned in at Emaus: and before he did the like with any wyne euen in the very bre­kyng of the bread, he vanysshed owt of their syght: but that bread was his body, as S. Augustine and Theophilact doe te­stifye, Aug. lib. 3. de consen. euā. ca. 25. Theo. [...] Lucam cap. 24. therfore was there receiuyng of Christ his bodye vnder one kynd in the primitiue church. I trust this testymonie be auncient inowgh. Likewise in the .xx. of the actes of the Aposteles, S. Paule & the Christians came together, vpō a son­day, to breake bread: but there is no men­tion of wine, ergo they did receiue vnder one kynde. Yf yow deny the brekyng of bread, to be takē in that place, for the sa­cramēt: besydes that lerned fathers do so expownd it, Act. 20. the tyme it selfe, (bycause it [Page 129] was the next day after the Saboth, which is ow [...] sonday) doth make it lykely, & the latenesse of receiuing of it, is a good ar­gument therof also. Bycawse yf they had com to supper, they would haue tasted therof before midnyght, but at midnyght the young man Eutichus fel downe from the vpper loft, where S. Paule preached, or talked to them, and after that the Apostle had putt them in good comfort, that he was not dead: then loe, he ascended a­gayne and brake bread, and tasted it, and so cōtynued his talke vntill the morning. So that the circūstance of the day, which the Christians kept holy, and the vnsea­sonablenes of the tyme, to goe to supper after mydnyght, sytting downe to it be­fore sonn sett at the least: doth proue bet­ter, that it was the sacrament, then that it was common bread. But yf yow deny the argument, that, bycause only bread is na­med, ergo there was no wine: remember, I pray yow thē, your owne fashion of rea­sonyng, when yow say, there is no mētion of this or that place, of S. Augustine, Ire­ney, Denys, & others, of a priuate masse: ergo they had no suche masse as we vse.

[Page] Item there is no mention of lyfling vpp the sacrament, or setting it vnder a ca­nopye, or of the solutions to schole mē ­nes questions: ergo there must be no such thinges at all. further then, yow doe not denye, Libr. 2. ad vxor. Lib. de. co­rou [...] mili­tis. but in Tertullian his tyme, the sa­crament of the one kynd, I meane of bre­ad, was caryed by the Christians home to their howses. and receiued, at their neces­sities (yf persequution or sicknes did com vpon them) or r [...]ceiued at their most lei­sure and deuotion (yf there were no daū ­ger towardes them) And playne it is, Cyp. Ser. 5 de lapsis. by S. Cypryane, that in his tyme some cary­ed the sacrament of one kynde, home also with them. But yow answered, this to be an abuse: well yet then, the communion vnder one kynde, owght not to be so straunge vnto yow: As allso yf it were an abuse, it was in carying it home, not in ta­kyng it vnder one kynde. Cyp. serm. de lapsis And S. Cipry­an, yf he had vnderstode the sayinges of Christ, so grosselye as yow doe, he would neuer haue suffered the people, to haue been robbed of half the sacrament, he would neuer haue thowght any profyte [Page 130] or presence to be in the one kynde, ex­cept with the concurring of the other, & then, he could not haue writen it, for a greate miracle, that when a nawghty wo­man, did begyn to open her chest, in the which that holy thing of owr lorde was, she was made a frayed, Ireneus in epist. ad beat. Vict. with fyer rysing from thence, that she should not touch the sacramēt with her vnworthy handes. This would S. Ciprian neuer haue decla­red, for (according vnto your myndes) he should neuer haue beleiued it. Now, to lett passe an auncyent custome of the church of Rome, which was, that the sa­crament should be sent reuerently, vnto straungers, priestes and Bishoppes, which came to Rome: (which proued that the sacrament was kept, and consequentlie therfor in one kynd, bycause wyne doth quyckely wax sowar) And that in S. Iero­me his tyme (which M. Iuell mentioneth in the begynnyng of this sermon of his) the sacrament was reserued, and caryed home of some Christians: And to lett passe, a prouision of Melciades Bishopp and martyr, that bycause of heretikes, [Page] (which did not all thinges rightlie) the sacrament should be sent from church to church (which by good reason, should be in forme of bread) to let all these pas­se, Basil. ad Caesar. patritiā I will rehearse onely S. Basils testimo­nye, for this matter, which sayth: Ye we­re superfluous, to declare, that in the tyme of persequution no priest or deacon being pre­sent, a man to be constrayned by necessitie, to receyue with his owne handes the commu­nion, is not euyll or hurtfull. bycause that by long custome, euen by the very vse and prac­tyse of thinges, this hath ben confirmed, for they, which lead a solitary lyfe, in wildernes­se, where no priest is, kepying the Sacrament with them, they communicate by them selues. And in Alexandria and Aegipt, euery one of the lay people, for the most part, hath the cō ­munion in his owne howse. Of which testi­monye, it is gathered, that the priest may as well receiue alone in the church, as the people may at home: And also, that the sacrament was kept for the feare of death, which seemed to be alwayes present, in the pers [...]quutiō which raged: And therfor of goo [...] lykelihode, it was kept in one [Page 131] kinde, where as wyne wil sone be altered: Now, if these reasons and authorities did nothing proue agaynst hym, we may, by M. Iuells leaue, vse exāples and histories: emōg which it is a notable one, that Dionis [...]s Alexandrinus scholar vnto Origi­nes, reporteth of Serapiō a man of Alexā ­dria, which lying three dayes spechelesse, on the soweith, Eccl. hist. li. 6. ca. 44 called his dawghter vnto hym, and willed some to be sent vnto the priest for the sacrament. But the priest beyng syck, he deliuered the messenger a part therof, cōmaunding hym to dipp it first in somwhat and to soften it, (for drie bread goeth downe very hardly with sick persons) & so to deliuer it to the old man his master. And the old man after he had receiued it, departed this world gladlye. Owt of which exāple it is necessa [...]lie ga­thered, that first the priest had in his house 1 redy, before hād, the sacramēt. (which they say, is nothing except it be straytwaies v­sed) Then that Serapiō receiued it alone, 2 withowt a cōmuniō (wheras except three receiue at the lest, the [...] say nothing is done, 3 or two, as others hold) & last of al it may [Page] be gathered, that it was vnder one kynde, either as most meetest to be kept, either most safe to be caryed, or, as likewise profitable to the sicke person, as yf both kyn­des shold haue been delyuered. A nother exāple as notable, Ambr. in orat. sune­bri de obi­ [...]u frat. sui is, of S. Satyrus. S. Am­brose his brother, which, before he was fullie and perfectlie traded in owr religion, beyng in dawnger of shipwrack, requyred of the perfect Christiās, which were in the same ship and dawnger with hym, to ha­ue that diuine sacramēt of the Christiās, Not to sett a curiouse eye, vpon those misteries, but to haue helpe for his fayth. Which being geuen vnto hym, he made it to be bound vp in a stole, and the stole he wrapped abowt his necke, and passing vpon no boerde or rybb of the broken shipp, to help him selfe withall, he was sa­felye and meruelouslye browght to land, and straytwaies askyng, where the church was, thyther he went, and receiued that blessed Sauior, which had deliuered him from drowning. Loe, what can we haue more, for owr purpose, and more against heretikes, then, that withowt the church, [Page 132] the Christians had the Sacramēt, and that it was in one kynde (except they can de­uyse, how to kepe wyne, by wrapping it vp in a stole.) Also that it was no fan­tasticall 2 figuratiue memory, which saued a man from such dawngers. And that S. Satyrus 3 receiued the same vnder one kynde, in which he did beare it. Wherfore, lett M. Iuell crake no more, before this be answered. And lett hym be humble in sprite, not to think, that nothing is wri­ten, but which he knoweth of, or to pro­uoke all the lerned men this day alyue, of which some haue writen of this matter so much and so effectuallie, that he will haue no leisure to reade them, and much lesse habilitie, to answer them. ‘Or that the people had their common prayers in a straunge tong, Iuell. that they vnder stode not.’ I think verely, that as euery countrye was conquered, by the preaching of the Apo­stles successors. so the conquerors therof, planted such order of seruice, as the mo­ther church vsed, from which they were sent. Euen as S. Augustine, when he came from Rome, in to this countrie of owrs, [Page] he made not a new Englisshe seruice, or Kentish rather, after the nature of those quarters, Laten ser­ [...] was brought in to England by S. Augu [...]ne, and vsed there generallie. at which he arriued: but rathe [...] vsed the Romane fasshion and language. neither hath it euer ben writen or testi­fyed, that according to the diuersit [...]s of speaches here in England, proper seruice for euerye quarter therof, was prouided. But the cōtrarie rather doth appere, that one tong was generally vsed in their mas­se and mattins. [...]uen as at these dayes, there is no fault fownde, or ells it is no dawngerous fault, for the Welsche men, Cornyschemen, Northerne, and Irysh, to vse one order of the English church, and the longer it is suffered, the farther of it is still from amendyng: So, what cause is there, why that laten seruice beyng browght into this realme, by the Pope his goodnes, and owr Apostle S. Augusti­ne, the same myght not cōtinew throwgh the realme, as it was by litle and litle, sub­dewed vnto the ghospell of Christ. Es­peciallie where as in these dayes fault is fownd, with the vnknowen tong, which people can not vnderstand, and yet the [Page 133] welshemen haue no welshe communyon, and at those blessed and quyet tymes, there was no lack fownd at all, when the priest and the clergye, should syng and pray by them selues, and the people by them selues entend their priuate deuo­tion. S. Paule writing to the Romaynes, not a forme of seruice but a verie sermon (as it were,) wherin he entreateth of most high, and agayne most familiar matters, yet he write in Greik and not Latin.

Which thing, did he, (trow yow) for the lack of the Latin tong? no, that is not trew, in him, which had the gift of all ton­ges. Did he think, that all the Romanes, had the knowledge of Griek, as well as of Latin? Trulye, that was for any simple man more meeter to think, then for the wisedome of S. Paule. Had he forgotten him self, beyng allwayes of that mynde, that in the cōgregation, he would rather speke fiue wordes, that other myght be the better for them, then fiue thowsande in a s [...]rawnge tong? No, he thowght to earnestly of the cause of Christ, to for­gettsuch a principall matter, as this is, [Page] according to the heretykes declamati­ons. And then, in an epistle, by twentie partes, there is more cause, to wryte in the vulgare tong, then in a cōmon pray­er, bycause in the seruice, the quyer occu­pyeth the place of the people, and answe­reth in their steede: but in his epistle, no­ne were excepted, but, Rom. 1. vnto all you which be at Rome, welbeloued of God, and fayth­full, grace be to yow (sayth he▪ and peace. In to the quyer all dyd not come in a clom­pe togeather, to here what the priest did reade, but abowte the pulpet, or other where, all myght stand well inowgh to here the epistle readen. And so after this sort, I myght fynd twentie differencyes, betwixt an order of seruice, and an epist­le. Wherfore I wonder much, that they make such a brablyng, abowte the straū ­ge tong. and requyre, what aucthoritie, example or reason we haue for it, owt of Doctor, Councell, or, Antiquitye. It is reason, auctoritye, and proufe abundant, for a Christian man: that, this or that thing hath ben done or vsed vniuersallie in the church of Christ, 1. Tim. 3. were it vsed but [Page 134] for one yeare onlye, bycause the church is the pyllar of truth, and hath the holy ghost her teacher and gouernor for euer, and neuer hath ben suffered vtterly to haue erred, in all her members at one tyme. And then, wheras the latin seruice in the Latin church hath been so long vsed in these contreys, which vnderstode not the latin tong, and also they confesse a very long vse of it, yt is well inowgh proued, that there is no dampnable error in the matter. for what tong fownd yow, M. Iuell, in the English church, when yow were borne? or how long before, had the english seruice, been left vnsayed, and the latin entertayned, a strawnger before a cuntreye man of owr owne? yf yow can bryng forth the bokes, where the english common prayers, were euer in the com­mon vulgare tong, and tell vs the name but of one Bishop, which vsed it in his diocese, yow shall make all men wonder at your inuention, and yf, neuer, any o­ther but latin, hath ben vsed, yt is autho­rytie and reason sufficient for all English men, that the first cōuertors of this land, [Page] vnto the sayth, did leaue the latin seruice in it, nothing fearing or caring, what a few fyne felowes would persuade to the contrarie, after .viij. or .ix. hundred yeares continuance. Then also, must all prayers of necessitie, be in the common tong, or may a few be excepted? yf yow except any one: why should not the people here all, and answer Amen vnto all? and espe­ciallie in the most secrete matters, which haue most weight in them, and in which the cause of the people, is most expres­sed? yf all of necessitie, must be audiblye expressed: how then doth your doctrine agree with S. Basill, and S. Chrysosto­mes masses, in the which the chief priest prayeth secretelye at the altar, at certen places, whiles the quyer in the meane ti­me syngeth? Or how could S. Ambros [...] (O worthy Byshop) how could he stan­ding at the alter commaund the Empe­ror by his archedeacon to stand without the Chauncell doores? Rather he shuld haue sayd to the Emperor, in his own person, in owr most hūble request, maye it please your most excellent wysedome [Page 135] and maiestye, to com more nere to the altar, to here the word of God, which doth saue our sowles, or els to cōmaunde the altar to be pulled downe, and that a table maye com downe to your highnes the more commodiouslye to answer A­men, vnto my blessing, euen, as it shall please your maiestie, so shall it be. But not so S. Ambrose, not so, he, which mo­ved not one [...]oote from the altar, but sent his archeadeacon, not with supplica­tion, but with reprehension, not as to an Emperor of the world, but as to a com­mon Christian, saying: O Emperour, the inward places are appoynted for priestes onelye, Hist. Eccl. li. 9. ca. 30. which others are not permitted, neither to entre into, neither to touche. Goe furth therfore, and [...]arye, for the re­ceiuyng of the mysteries, as others doe: for purple maketh Emperours, and not priestes. Vnto which, the Emperor an­swered so mekely and Christianlike, that he is more to be wondered at, for the o­uercummyng of his passions, then con­querying of barbarous nations. But, to my purpose, it appeareth by this distin­ction [Page] of places in the church, that the people were not suffered to here al thin­ges. And therfor I conclud, that wheras it is no necessite that all thinges be vn­derstode, which the priest in the church sayeth, yea rather, yf thys be agaynst all good order and discipline, there is no necessitie, that the tong should be com­mon all to geather, where the hering of the same tong, must be kept secrète.

I would to God, that this question of the heade of the church of Christ, were throughlie knowen, it would stop a great sorte, of hastye preachers and ignorant, which think them selues able to do much, by cause they can speak in a matter indif­ferent probablye: as communion vnder bothe kyndes, seruice in the vulgare tong, and such like. But, to this question of M. Iuells, I answer, askyng him first, whether any prince of that tyme, of which he speaketh, did beare the title of defendor of the faith? and if neither Constantinus, [Page 136] neither Theodosius, neither any Chri­stian good Emperor, were precisely then so called, shall it folow, that one may ta­ke that title, from the kinges of England? Many thinges may trulye be verifyed of certen persons, which yet they doe refu­se, not as vnagreyng with their dignitie, but as vnapt for keepyng their humilitie. As S. Peter, S. Paule, S. Iames, and Iohn, with all the rest of the blessed Apostles, Matth. [...]. Psal. 44. 2. Cor. 10. were the lightes of the world, and rulers of the earth, and cōquerors of all power, which would sett it selfe against Christ, and they dyd not obserue that stile in their writynges, neither any of their di­sciples after them, which also were ligh­tes and gouernors of the world. Further it ys to be considered how this worde (vniuersall Bisshopp) is to be taken. For yf yow meane vniuersall Bisshopp, that besydes hym there is no other in all the world, but that he is one for all, as the word importeth: then also at these da [...]es, there is no vniuersall Bishop. But yf he be called vniuersall which among all Bi­shoppes is the chiefest and one ouer all, [Page] so ys there, In what sense in vniuersall bisshop ys to be graū ­ted and must be, one vniuersall Bisshopp in the church of Christ. First then, I answer, that yf none were called vniuersal Bishop .vjC. yeares after Christ yet the lack or not geauyng of that title, doth not proue, that there was no such thyng, or no supreame heade ouer the church. And further I saye, that also in these dayes, there is no vniuersall Bishop, yf we take the worde, after som one fas­shyon. For in S. Gregorye his tyme (of which place M. Iuel in his sermons doth oft triumph) the Bishop of Constanti­nople forgetting the humilitie of Christ owr Sauyor, did much couet to be called vniuersall Bishop: presuming, that sith he was Bishopp of the same citie, where the Emperour then dwelt, which was onlye Emperour of all: that hys name, for that place, might lykewise, with this gloriouse title (of vniuersall Bishop) be right well adorned. against whom S. Gregorie did write, and speake ernestlye, cōdempning the desyre of that gloriouse title, grown­ding his argument vpon the signification of this worde, (vniuersall.) Bicause (saith [Page 137] he) in the epistle vnto Ihon, Bishopp of Constantinople) one should seeme, to take away the glory of Bisshoprick [...]s, frō all the rest of his brothers, which would challenge vnto hym selfe, to be called the vniuersall Bishop. Trew it is therfor, that there is no Bishop vniuersall in that for­te, as who should say he were onelie a Bi­shopp, but lyke as [...] the tyme of the old lawe, Num. 11. not onlye Moyses had the grace of gouerning and prophecyeing, but seuen­tie elders of the people of Israel, had im­parted vnto them of his spirite and dig­nitie, and lyke as Moyses lost nothing of his perfection, for all the dispensing of some of his graces, emong [...] certen of the elder and worthier: so the Pope ys not so singular, but that he hath felow Bishoppes to take part of his functiō, and for all the multitude of his felowes in of­fice, he continueth in his supremacie, as a Moys [...]s aboue the septuagintes. And so, onlye he hath not al the spirite of God, which for the profit of the body, is distri­buted in to sundrie membres, and none yet ys equall vnto hym in superioritie of [Page] gouernement, bycause in euerye seemelie bodie, one part ys higher then all the rest. Agayne, S. Gregorie, which was a most blessed Bishopp, myghte and did iustely, fynd fault with Iohn of Constantinople, bicause of his prowd enterprise, although it were graūted, that the title (vniuersal) myght haue been verified in any one Bi­shop. So in one sense, which I haue spo­ken of, I grawnte that there was neuer, and that now there is none, which is an vniuersall Bishopp. But yet yf we vnder­stand an vniuersal Bishop so, that emong Bisshoppes there must be one senior vn­to all the rest, and eldest brother of all, vnder whose correction, they shall eche one, enioye their priuileges, which the [...]heife father and ruler hath appointed, in this sense, I will proue, that there was an vniuersall Bishopp, euer in the church of Christ. S. Anacletus in his second epi­stle, Anacletus [...]pist. 2. This holye and Apostolike church of Rome (sayeth he) hath the primacie and preemiinēci [...], ouer all other churches, and ouer the whole stock of Christ, not by the Aposte­ [...]s, but from owr Lorde owr Sauior, hym [Page 138] selfe, as he saide hym selfe vnto S. Peter, thow art Peter, Matth. 16. and vpon this rocke (this Pe­ter) I will buyld my churche. Also S. Ci­pryan declaring the returne, Cip. Cor. li. 3. ep. 11. of certen schismatikes vnto the faith, prayseth much those wordes of theirs, where they sayde. VVe knowe, that Cornelius is sett vp, by al­myghtye God, and Christ owr Lorde, There is one supre­me head in the church Bishop of the most holye Catholike church. And af­ter a litle space: VVe are not ignor [...]nt, (saye they) that there must be one God, one Christ owr Lorde, whom we haue con­fessed, and one Bishop, in the catholike church. The same blessed doctor also, Lib. 1. ep. 3. in an epi­stle vnto S. Cornelius, sayth, that heresies haue rysen of no other cause, but that the priest of God, is not obeyed, and one priest in the church, vice Chri­sti iudex. to iudge as vicar of Christ, is not r [...]garded, or thowght vpon. Then Sainct Ambrose, wheras the whole world is godes, 1. Tim. 3. (sayth he) yet, the church is called his hou­se, of the which, Damasus is at this day, re­ctor and gouernour. Further yet S. Augu­stine, in diuers places, epist. 106. epist. 93. lib. de vtilitate credendi: calleth Rome Se­dem Apostolicam, and what is a seat Apo­stolike, [Page] but that place, which may plant and pull vp and sett and lett, and hath his power ouer the whole world. S. Ci [...]ll also, In lib. [...]hesau. As Christ (sayeth he) hath receiued of his father, the scepter and rule of the church of gentiles, which came owt of Israell a capi­tayne and duke ouer all principates and pow­ers, ouer all that, which so euer is, so that all thinges doe bowe downe vnto hym: so, Christ hath committed most fullye vnto Peter, and to no other then Peter, that which fullye is his, and to hym alone, he hath geuen it. And to make an end S. Gregory hym sel­fe, euen in that epistle, where he speaketh agaynst the pryde of hym, which would be called after a new fashion (vniuersall Bishopp.) It is clere (sayth he) vnto all them, Lib. 4. Ep. [...]p. 32. which know the Ghospell, that the charge of the whole church, was committed, by the voyce of owr Lord [...], vnto holie, S. Peter and chief Apostle emong all the Apo­steles, and yet (sayeth he afterwardes) he was not called vniuersall Bishopp. Wherfor vnto M. Iuells question, yf the name of vniuersall Bishopp, was not in the primi­tiue church: yet the thing it self was, as [Page 139] [...] shewed, so that the name it selfe [...] haue been vsed, in that sense, as it [...] Bishopp which hath charge [...] and of all the Catholike [...]. But as it signifyeth hym, which [...] other Bishop but hym selfe [...] there neither was, [...] Bishopp vniuersall. ‘ [...] people were then tawghte, to [...] Christes [...] ys reallye, [...] carnail [...]e, or [...].’ The [...] [...]ome of God, is not in wordes, but in power and strength, and allbeyt, owt of hand, it could not be fownd, to bryng a writer so auncient, as yow requi­re, for euery one of those termes, yet is the cause nothing the worse: so that it may appere, it is not well to striue vpon the [...], when the thing it selfe is eui­dent. by any meanes, that in the Sacrament is his verye body. For I think it would be very hard, to find, in any wri­ting, of old and holy doctor with in .vjC. yeares of Christ, all these wordes, that he take r [...]all, substantiall, corporall, carnall, & naturall fl [...]sh [...] of the virgin Marie, and yet they were instructed perfectlie, to beleue [Page] that Christ toke owr verye flesh, and not a figure onlye therof, as the Maniches did euill report. And so, yf I could no [...] bring example of all the termes, which yow would haue proued, yet yf I can cō ­clude that the verye body, and not a fan­tasticall supposed bodye, is in the sacra­ment, for the wordes of carnall, reall, cor­porall, substanciall, and naturall, I need not be woefull. In the sacrament (sayeth S. Ierome vnto Hebidia) the verye body [...] of Christ, ys, of which bodye (sayeth Isichi­us in Leu. lib 6. Cap, 22.) S. Gabriel did say vnto the virgin, the holie ghost shall com vpon the. It is called of S. Cyrill, lib. 3. in. 10. Cap. 37. & lib. 10. Cap. 13. the body of lyfe it selfe, or, of naturall lyfe. Of Origene the bodye of the worde: Of S. Chrisostome, the body which is partaker of the diuine na­ture. 1. Cor. Cap. 10. Of S. Augustine, Psal. 33. the verye crucifyed bodye, in the which he suffered so greate thinges. Of Chri­s [...]stome againe. 1. Cor. Cap. 10. the body which was nayled vpon the crosse, beaten, wounded with spere, which was not ouercō ­med with death. What will a Christian [Page 140] man aske more? and what neede to bring owt the wordes, of carnall, reall, corpo­rall, naturall, wheras, the bodye of Christ being present, and that body, which was borne of the virgin Marye: it foloweth, that it is reall and naturall, or els, we are fallen from owr fayth, in which we bele­ue, that he toke reall flesh of the blessed virgin. And here also, where fynd you, not onelye within .vjC. yeares of Christ, but within .vj. and .vj. hundred, and take three more vnto them, that the people were taught, to beleue, that the body of Christ is, onlye figuratiuelye, sacramētallie, sig­nificatiuelye, tropicallie, imaginatiuelie, in the Sacrament, to the denyall of all presence and realitie? S. Damascene, Lib. 4. de orthodox [...] fide ca. 14. a notable father, writing purposelye of the sacrament of the altar, sayeth, that it is not simple bread or fode, but vnited vnto the di­uinitie, Also hread and wyne (sayth he) is not a figure of the bodye and bloud of Christ, (God forbed,) but it is the very deisyed bo­dy of owr Lorde, where as he hath sayed him selfe, this is my body, not a figure of my body, and not a figure of my bloud, but my bloud. [Page] But M. Iuell appealeth vnto the .vjC. yeres, next after Christ, Vnto those .vjC. doth he appeale? Vnto those .vjC. he that be browght, And I require hym to shew furth, where it was euer tawght, with in vj.C. yeares after Christ, that Christes bodie was in the sacrament figuratiuelye onely? Lett one sentence, example, au­cthoritye, worde, or sillable, be browght furth, of a bodye, onelye figuratiue and significatiue: and he shal haue the victo­rye. Iuell. Yea but (sayth he) the reall, corporall, carnall, naturall presence, was not preached or tawght, at those dayes, ergo a figuratiue bodye onelye was beleued. And thus whi­les we stryue vpon termes onely, we spend the tyme in a questiō not necessarie, and he will not consider the truth, in it self, as it is. Luc. 20. Christ sayd, this is my bodye, which shalbe delyuered for yow. Saye the truth, Is not this, playne inowgh? what yf he had sayd, this is my naturall body, should all mysbeleife on yowr part, haue ceased? I thinke not. for these wordes (which shalbe deliuered for yow,) do, as playne­ly expresse, what bodye he meaneth, as yf [Page 141] he had vsed, the worde naturall, or cor­porall. what difference is in these poyn­tes, M. Iuell, and the named Bishopp of Sarum, and he, which in the yeare of owr Lorde. 1561. preached at Paules crosse the second sonday before Easter? and, af­ter this sort, yf I would proced further, what difference were there, or how ma­ny persons, myght I be thowght to haue named, in the iudgement of them, which know the state of this world? what od­des is there, betwene fowre pens, and a grote? what difference, betwixt the very body of Christ, and the reall bodye? the body borne of the blessed virgin, and the naturall bodye? the corporall bodye, and his very flesh? the carnall bodye, and the bodye which was delyuered vnto death, and hanged on the crosse, for vs? This is not childisshnes onely, but very wanton­nes, to aske for the terme, of a corporall and reall body, and not to be cōtent with such a bodye, which dyed for vs: to be­leue owr eyes, yf we should see hym, and to discredite his voyce, when we doe he­re hym: not to be able to deny but this is [Page] the bodye, which was delyuered for vs, and yet to require, whether it be his na­turall bodye or no? And yet, bycause the church owr mother, which in her selfe is strong, doth condescend vnto the infir­mitie of those, which once the browght furth, I will shew in one testimony, that euen in playne worde corporallie, Christ his body is geuen vnto the faythfull. And yf copye of wordes delite M. Iuell, I will proue also, that he is naturally in his faithfull. S. Cyrill, Lib. 10. ca. 13. in loan. a blessed and auncyent fa­ther, in reprouyng and confutyng a cer­ten Arrian, which vpon those wordes of Christ, I am the vyne, and my father is the husbandman, Ioan.15. wold inferr, that Christ and God the father, were not of one substan­ce, no more then a vyne and a husband­man, are: which Arrian also sayde, that those wordes, I am a vyne, &c.) apper­teyned vnto the diuinitie, and not the humanitie of Christ. S. Cyrill, (I saye) in confuting this reason, hath these wordes: VVe doe not denye, but we are ioyned spiri­tuallie vnto Christ by right fayth, a [...]d syn­cere charitie: but yet, that there is no waye [Page 142] of the ioyning of vs togeather, with hym, accordyng to the flesh, that trulie we doe ve­terly denye. And we say, that, to be altogea­ther, besides the Scriptures. For who hath do [...]ted, Christ, euen after this fashion (vn­derstand according to the flesh) to be the vyne, 1. Cor. 10. and vs to be the branches, which recei­ue and get lyfe from thence. Here S. Paule, saying, that all are one bodie in Christ. For althowgh we be many, yet in him we be one, for all take parte of one bread. Doth he think perchaunce (meaning the Arrian) that we doe not know the strength, and power of the mis [...]icall benediction? which, Note Corpora [...]. when it is done in vs, [...] not make Christ also corpo­rallie to dwell in vs, throwgh the communi­cating of the flesh of Christ? For why are members of the faithefull, 1. Cor. 10. the members of Christ? know yow not (saith S. Paule) that your members are the members of Christ? And shal I then make the members of Christ the members of an harlo [...]? God for send. Also, owr Sauior sayeth: he that [...]ateth my fl [...]sh and drinketh my bloud, remayneth [...] me, and [...]in hym. whervpon, it is to be con­sidered, that Christ is in vs, nos onely by ha­bitude [Page] and fashion, that which is vnderstode to be throwgh charitie, Naturall partici­pation of Christ. but also euen by na­turall participation. For, like as yf a man, melting waxly the fyer, would so mengle it with an other wax likewise melted, that of them bothe, one certayne thing may seeme to be made: so by the communicatyng of the bo­dy and bloud of Christ he is in vs and we are in hym. For otherwise, this corruptible nature of owr bodye, could not be browght vnto incorruption and lyfe, except the bodie of natural lyfe, were ioyned togeather with it. Doest thow not beleue me, speakyng these thynges? geue credi [...]e then, I beseche the, vn­to Christ. loan. 6. Verely verely I saye vnto yow, except yow eate (sayth he) the flessh of the soun of man, and drink his bloud, yow shall not haue lyfe in yow, &c. In this testimo­nye of S. Cyril, althowgh it be playne to vnderstand, yet shal I put you in remem­brance, of noting two poyntes, the one, that he sayeth, Christ to be in vs, by cha­ritie, but not onelye throwgh charitie, which is, when we beleue in hym, and long for hym, and thank hym for his be­nefites: the other, that euen by naturall [Page 143] participation and corporallie, and by the naturall body of lyfe, he is in vs. Ergo, it is false▪ to say that the receiuing of Christ is onely by faith, and that the body which we receiue, is onlye a figuratiue spiritual bodye, which, heretikes haue inuented. And on the other syde, it is trew that be­sydes the spirituall receiuyng of Christ, through [...]h [...], there is an other kynde, by which his naturall body, is corporallie ioyned to owr corporall bodye, in which, the Catholikes doe beleue. So that (to vse the wordes of [...]. Cy [...]l, which folow in the place forenamed) both spirituallie and corporallie, we are b [...]nches, and Christ is the vyne. And yf yow aske the waye, how this hath been, and is browghte to passe? the same Doctor in an other place▪ declareth it most plainelye. Corporallie (sayeth he) the soun of God, Lib. 11. in lo. ca. 27. throwgh the mysticall bles­sing is vnited to vs, as man: but spirituallie, as God: he is vnited vnto vs, by renewyng owr spirite, by the grace of his spirite, vnto a newlyfe, and vnto the partakyng of the di­uine nature. Christ therfore is the knyt­ting vp, of owr vnion with God, which is na­turallie [Page] vnited vnto vs, as man: vnto God the father, as God. More authorities of this blessed father, and of others, mygh [...] be recited, to the proufe hereof, that women, are ioyned naturallye and corpo­rallye, vnto Christ: not onely by that he toke owr nature on hym, in the vitgin [...] wombe: but also rather, bycause we eate hys flessh, and drink hys bloud, throwgh the strength of the misticall benediction. But one instāce is sufficient against him, which vniuersallie belyeth the Catholi­kes, that they haue no proufe at all, to d [...] ­clare that the naturall, reall, corporall bo­die of Christ should be in the Sacramēt, which is so vntruly reported, that the do­ctors conclude, (S. Cyrill, in the place al­leaged, S. Hilarye in the .viij. boke De tri­vitate, S. Gregory Nissenus in oratione ca­techetica, and others in diuers places) that except this bodye of owrs, had a lyuche bodye, by participatiō of which, it should be repayred: it were impossible, that it should ryse agayne, when it were once by death cast downe. not bycause, God of his absolute power, were not able to [Page 144] haue done it, The here­tikes doe wea [...] owr hope of the resurrecti­on of owr flesshe. which withowt the incar­nation of his blessed soun myght haue saued the world, but the order most wyse and agreable once beyng lett owt, by al­mightye God, that owr sowle by his spi­rite, owr body by his flesh, should be pro­perlye preserued: now, in this order and wisedome, he, which taketh away from Christians a bodely reall presence, he ta­keth awaye the proper and chiefest hope of the resurrection of bodyes.

This question neadeth not, as many o­thers, which folow in the s [...]rmon. First bi­cause 1 the principall matter establesshed, that the bodye of Christ is present, when so euer a lawfull priest doth cōsecrate the bread: reason doth declare her fowle so­lye, to goe aboute to reproue that thing, which by fayth we must stand vnto, by­cause of an absurditie, which should seme to folow. Then, wheras owt of one prin­ciple 2 a hundred conclusions may be de­duct [...], it is not necessary, that euery con­clusion be expresselie writen in the aun­cyent [Page] fathers workes, or ells that we ma­ke doub [...]e of the principle, which after­wardes I will make more playne and pro­bable. 3 Thirdlye, wheras the Catholikes do teach, that Christ is not locally in the Sacrament, as in a place: to aske of them, wherby they proue that Christes body is or may be, in a thowsand places, which do know but of one place, which his body (circūscriptiue) occupyeth, and yet bele­ue, that he is verilye and bodylie present, in euery consecrated host? it is quyte owt of the purpose. Yet for all this, I wil shew what S. Chrisostome answereth vnto the like question, as M. Iuell moueth. which in expounding of those wordes of Sainct Paule to the Hebrewes, Heb. 9. & 10. ho. 17. that Christ doth not offer vp hym selfe, oftentymes, as the priest in the olde law, did enter in to the most holye places euery yeare with the bloud of beastes: How then doe we? sayth Chrisostome, doe we not offer vpp euery daye? we doe offer in deed, but as men, which make a reme [...]brance of his death. And this sacrifice is one, not manie. How is it one, and not many? bycause, that once beyng of­fered, [Page 145] it was offered in to the most holye pla­ces, and this sacrifice is an example, taken owt of that. VVe offer vp, the self same all­wayes, and not trulye, this tyme one lambe, to morow an other, but allwayes the self sa­me. Therfor this sacrifice is one, other ells, by this reason, bycause it is offered in many places, there be many Christes. No not so, but Christ is one euery where, both here full and whole, and there full and whole, one bo­dye. For as he, which is euery where, offered vp, is one bodye and not many bodyes, so al­so the sacrifice is one. Now, he is one Bishop, which offered vp the sacrifice, which did ma­ke vs cleane, the same we also now doe offer, which at that tyme beyng offered, could not be consumed. Yet this which we doe, is done in remembrance, of that which was done. For (sayth Christ) doe this in remembrance of me, we make not an other sacrifice, as the Bi­shopp did, but allwayes the same, or rather, we make the remembrance of that sacrifice. Therfor I conclude, that not onelye, it is readen, emong auncyent fathers, that Christ his body, may be, and ys, in diuers places offered, but that the cause therof, [Page] is, for that Christ is but one, in all dayes and places. Note the diuersitie of making cōclusions, for the he­retikes parte, or catholikes faith. And note here the diuersitie of reasonyng betwixt heretikes and ca­tholikes. They say, there be many chur­ches: ergo by all reason ther must be ma­ny bodyes, yf Christes verye bodye be on the altar in euery church. The catholi­kes saye with Chrisostome, there is but one Christ: ergo no absurditie there is, yf he be offered vp this daye, and to mor­row, and euery day, in euery place, in the whole world. They, by the grosse num­bring vp of diuers places, would conclu­de agaynst vs, that there must be many bodyes. The Catholikes, by the beleuing and confessing of one bodye, doe grawnt that he is in many places, withowt diui­sion, bycause the bodye is but one. They, begyn at their senses, and according to the reason of them, they conclude mat­ters of fayth. The Catholikes begyn with fayth, and afterwardes cōmaunde silence and quyetnes, to their senses.

Here be .9. questions, as it were .9. wor­thyes, not all worth one good poynt. For it is vnskilfullie required, that of parti­cular thinges any accompt should be ge­uen, which are deducted, and may be mo­re deducted herafter, owt of the princi­pall conclusion. As, to shew in other ex­amples [Page] how vnlearned & peltyng a kind of reasoning this is which he vseth: A verie sond kynd of interro­gatories & questiōs moued by M. Iuell. I aske hym, where he did euer read in scripture, that Christ did crye for his mothers bre­ast, or that euer he lawghed, or euer dyd were peticote, hosen, or showes, or euer did goe in his mothers errant, or, by his handy labor, helpe forward towardes her finding? Which all, are credible inowgh, (bicause he toke vpon hym owr very na­ture) and all yet, are not necessary to be wryten. Then to come to the Apostles: where did he euer read, that in their ex­ternall behauior, they did weare frockes or gownes, or fower corned cappes, or rochetes, or, that they did euer cate sodd, roste, or bake meates, or that a compa­ny of laye men seruātes, did folow them, all in one lyuerye, or that at their prayers they satt in sydes, or laye in the grownd, or fall prostrate, or sang Te Deum, or lo­ked towardes the sowth, or did weare co­pes of tissue or veluett, with a thowsand more such questions? which be verie ma­ny, and not necessarye, bycause they liued and fared vndoubtedlie, as occasion and [Page 147] cause serued, and they dyd honor God with the best that they had. And yf they were not so ryche, to bye tissue, I think not therfor, that they were naked in their seruice, and yf the church now, hath gol­den copes, they must not be taken away from her, bicause of the Apostles pouer­tie. In whose dayes, as I neede not to tell, what deckyng of the place they vsed, whe­re God should be honored, so reason ge­ueth, that they tho [...]ght nothing to good for him. Lett all thinges be done emong you (sayeth S. Paule) honestlie and according vnto order. 1. Cor. 14 This is a generall principle, with which principle in the Apostles ty­me, it did agree, that all should come, in to one place of prayer, as in to som vp­per chamber, lofte, or parlar: and the sa­me conclusion agreed with Sainct Sylue­ster, Sainct Ambrose, S. Chrisostomes, and other tymes folowing, whē the quyer was appoynted for the clergye, and the bodye of the churche for the layetie. In the primitiue church, when persequutiōs of Christians, dyd so much encrease, all blacke apparell did becom the clergie [Page] well inowgh: but afterwardes, when all nations of the world were conuerted vn­to Christ, and Emperours browght their glory into the church, what deadly fault is there, yf a Cardinall weare a skarlet robe, and a Bisshopp a whyte rochett?

Not, yf perchaunse S Paule did trauell in his iorneys, for the most part, on fote: therfor, yow must sett all bisshoppes be­sydes their saddelles. And yf he did pray by the waters syde, and in priuate cham­bers: yow must not therefor ouerthrow all churches. For the principle is allwayes one, that we must doe thinges according vnto order. And so, the verytye is, that Christ hath left vnto vs hys verye bodye in the Sacrament, and this is playne by scriptures, councells, and fathers. Which veritye standyng: what harme is done, in the shewyng, of that hygh mysterye vnto the people? what difference and matter is it, whether it be holden in one hand, or two? lyfted vp ouer the head, or by the turnyng of the priestes face frō the altar, shewed vnto the people (which the Gre­cians doe vse?) Againe, the veritye of his [Page 148] bodye beyng present, what beast is he, which beleiueth it, and doth not worship [...]? And why myght it not be reserued for sick persons? and why not then closed in a golden or syluer box? and either, be sett vnder a canopye, or placed otherwise withall reuerence? Or how can he be, but an heretike, which sayeth not, that it is a figure or pledge, but onelye a figure, or onelye a pledge of hys bodye? Then, put the case, that for lack of lerning, or for lack of proufe, one could not shew yow examples, for those particular que­stiōs, in which yow require to be answe­red, the cōclusion and veritie, most playn­ly beyng proued, those other thinges may well folow afterwardes. As otherwise, yf the matter of a canopye, or lyfting it o­uer the head, or namyng of the heretike which sayde it was a figure onelie, if the­se thinges and such like, either were not then, or should not be alowed now: yet it remayneth still, that in the sacrament, is Christ his bodye, and to make playne what body is meaned, it foloweth, which shalbe delyuered for yow. Agayne, it is a [Page] ver [...]tie most certain, that Christ hath not left his church without guides and go­uernours, in which be, first Apostles, then Prophe [...]s, Ephes. 4. then Euāgelistes, after these, Pa­stors and Doctors, to the perfiting of her. Which if yow graunt, to what purpose is any talk or brable moued, if more mas­ses be sayd, in one church, at one tyme: if laye men be restrained from commen­ting vpon the Scriptures: or if the host be diuided in to three partes: or if the laie man receiue in one kynd alone? wher as all these thinges be such, that being once appointed, they must nedes be ob­serued. And if they neuer had ben ap­pointed, the veritie of the Sacramēt were nothing thereby diminished. To what purpose then, do I speak all this? Truly to come at length to some end with out aduersaries, and to geue wa [...]ing vnto our frendes, that in all thinges, they re­quire that, which is materiall and nec [...]s­sary, and lerne to distinct that, from thin­ges indifferent in them selues▪ also to ap­peale vnto the principall cōclusion, and not to meddle with lower matters before [Page 149] the principall be decided. Can you proue, saieth M. Iuell, that it was lawfull by the old Doctours and Councels, for the priest to pronounce the wordes of cōsecration closely? What then Sir? I can proue, that there was and must be, a principall head in the church, by whom we must be ruled, whe­ther he appoint the wordes closely or o­penly to be pronounced. how now then? should any wise man, and desirous of the truth, haue talk with an heretike aboute the open and close speaking of the priest, which dependeth of that other question, whether the Bisshoppes and heades of the church, may not rule the churche of Christ, as they shall see expedient? what a doe is made, about the cōmunion vn­der one kynde: of prayers in the vulgar tong: and of order in the seruice? in which questions, the heretike hath this aduan­tage, that whiles these thinges are indiffe­rent, he maye bring for him selfe, a pro­bable argumēt, and the Catholike, what­so euer he shall bring (except he goe to a higher questiō) he shall speak but pro­bablye, and so the hearer of bothe partes [Page] can not dissalow greately, any one. But if we wold come to that, which is the che­fe in all such indifferēt matters, and rea­son, whether we shold not obey the law­full Bishoppes and heads: this question concluded, would sone put to silence all heresy, and settle well the consciences of true Catholikes. I would faine be at an end, and I can not. For behold, more then a dosen interrogations do folow, which if I doe not answer: I think that will be the best answer, rather then to trouble both you and my self, in opening all the matters, which goe before and folow af­ter, vpon the foresaied interrogations. But what nedeth, that I go thorough all his interrogations and articles, whereas if we be able, to auouche against him any one of them all, he is content to yeld and subscribe.

I will shew therefor (which he demeth) that the priest hath authoritie to offer vp Christ vnto his father. Hebr. 5. Euery Bisshop (saieth the blessed Apostle vnto the He­brewes) selected and chosen out [...] of men, is appointed for men, in those thinges which ap­pertaine [Page 150] vnto God, that he offer vp giftes and sacrifices for sinnes. which being a generall proposition, ergo either there be no priests and Bishopes in the new lawe, or els they must haue a sacrifice, which they may offer. Which sacrifice must be of that valew, that none may offer it but he which is called therevnto, as Aaron was called▪ and which sacrifice, must be ac­cording to the order of Melchisedech, as it is writen, Psal. 109. Thou arte a priest for euer, according to the order of Melchisedech. Of which order, Christ our Lorde was in his last supper, as being the priest of the gen­tils, and not annoynted with visible oyle, as the olde Bishoppes of the lawe were, and thirdly, bycause he offred vp sacrifice there, his owne body and bloud, not in forme of bloud and flesh, but in forme of bread and wine, as Melchisedeth did be­fore. Of which order, Christ is truly saied to be a priest for euer (as Oecu [...]enius saieth) in respect of the priests which be now a dayes, by meanes of whom, Christ doth offer and also is offred. Therefore, if allmighty God hath taken an oth, and [Page] if it doth not repent him thereof, that Christ is priest for euer, according to 2 the order of Melchi [...]edech: and if these wordes (for euer) be verified in Christ, thorough priestes, which be now in the 3 world: and whereas Christ offred in his last supper his very body and bloud in formes of bread and wine (as it dyd ap­pertayne vnto the order of Melchise­dech:) how can it be saied, That prie­stes haue authoritie to offer vp Christ. that the priests haue no authoritie to offer his bodye, which, except it were offred, God should seme to repent him of his oth, and to 4 break it also? And further, except priestes made out of men, should offer it, no of­fering wold be at all (our Sauiour now, according to his visible forme, being as­cended in to heauen, and there abiding, vntill the last iudgement of the world.) And not onely by this argument, it is proued, that priestes may and should of­fer vp Christ, but also, by the very ex­presse commaundement of Christ in his last supper, when he sayed, Do this in re­membrance of me, Luc. 22. which commaundement except it had ben geuen, what man in all [Page 151] the world wold haue entreprised to haue cōsecrated the body of oure Lorde? For, as S. Deny [...] testifieth of the priests of his time, Lib. de E [...] ­cles. [...]ierarchi [...]. They did excuse them selues, reuerent­ly and Bishoplike, that they offred vp, the [...]olsome sacrifice which is farr aboue them, trying first vnto God decently, and saying, Thou hast sayed, Do this in my remembran­ce, and then beseching him, that they maye be made worthy, of so great a ministery and seruice, that they maye holylye consecrat the Sacrament. By which wordes it appereth, that the priestes of the primitiue church, much abashed at the excellency of their function, did yet take har [...]e of grace, to consecrat the holsom sacrifice, because they were commaunded so to do, by God him selfe. In which sense also, Sainct Basil praieth in his lyturgye and masse: Make me, (saieth he) meete, through the power of the holy Ghost, that I being endued with the grace of priesthood, maye stand at this holy table, and maye consecrat thy holy and vndefiled body, and precious bloud. And like wise again. For thy vnspeakable and exce­ding kindnes sake, withoute all mutation and [Page] conuersion, thou hast ben made man, and hast ben named oure Bishop, and hast deliue­red vnto vs, the consecratiō of this seruiceable, and vnbloudy sacrifice. And after this very sorte, all blessed men, haue euer done, in the church of Christ, not denying, but that all priestes do in very dede cōsecrat and offer vp the body of Christ: but le [...]t such an high ministery, might turne to reproch of their rashnes, in that behalfe, they alleage for their excuse the wordes of Christ, In com. in 1. Cor. 10. In com. in Heb. 10. saying, Do this in remembran­ce of me. Do not we offer vp Christ euery day, sayeth S. Chrisostom? And agay­ne, It is oure Bishop (Sayeth S. Ambrose) which offred vp the sacrifice, which clensed vs, In Psal. 38 the same offer we nowe also, which then being offred, can not be consumed. Let vs priestes therefor (sayeth the same blessed man in an other place) follow as we can, our high priest, that we maye offer vp sacri­fice, for the people, although weak in deserts, and good dedes, yet honourable for oure sa­crifice. for although Christ nowe doth not seme to offer, yet he is offred in earth, when that the body of Christ is offred. Wherefor [Page 152] I conclude, that it is a very lye, to saye that it can not be found in any auncient Doctor, that priestes haue authorite to offer vp Christ to his father.

Thus hauing then proued right suffici­ently, that he hath b [...]lyed the church, and the truth, for the rest of the questions, whether we can find in the olde fathers, the termes ex opere operato, or indiuiduum vagum, or the questions of the applying of the sacrifice, or of the accidents remai­ning, or the case which he moueth of a mowse: vnto all these which so roundely and gloriously, as if the field had ben wō ­ne, he bringeth forth all in a ray, I resist with one awnswer: that if I could finde them in old Doctours, yet at this tyme I would not seke them, and if they can not be found (as I may graūt without hinde­raunce of the Catholike faith) expressely and plainely sett forth: yet hath he won­ne nothing, vnto his purpose. And bicau­se this cōfession of myne (for what others will fa [...]e I can not tell) but yf this con­fession of myne maye seme to geue som­what vnto M. Iuells articles, I will there­fore [Page] agayne shortely make my aunswer more plainer. I graunt, that I finde not within .vj.C. yeares after Christ, that ex opere operato, and for the workes sake, sin­nes were forgeuē at the masse time. Ergo, saieth he, Iuell. the highest misteries and greatest of your religion be broken. No Syr, not so. for you aske whether within .vj.C. yeares after Christ, these or these termes, were expressed? and I aunswer no. as farr as I know. But if you aske me, whether these and these thinges be true, and whether thei were beleued? I wil plainely saie, yea and proue it plainely. But I will proue it, by the consent of lerned men, and the voice of the church, which hath ben sen­ce the .vj.C. yeares, of which you speake. But yow will haue the proufe, to be takē out of the .vjC. yeares, next after Christ: or ells you will not admitt it. As though this were your argument. what so euer was not preached, and so lefte in writing vjC. yeares after Christ, that is not true▪ but indiuiduum vagum was not mencio­ned with in these .vjC. yeares: ergo what so euer is proued by all lernyng, as con­cerning [Page 153] indiuiduum vagū, that is not true, bicause it was not spoken within those vjC. yeares. And as I haue made your ar­gumēt in indiuiduū vagū, so is it in all the other of your articles allmost, in whiche all, the fault which you finde, is that .viC. yeres after Christ were passed, before they were by the Catholikes published. Now, if this be a good reason, then do I con­fesse, that I am quyte ouercomed. But if that otherwise, it be nothing worth: then haue I lost nothing, in graunting, that with in .vjC. yeares after Christ, certain, yea most of those articles which he reci­teth, were not plainlie opened. how think yow? if that in the ende of August, when frutes are ripe and are tasted to be good, yet some one sadd witted felow, would cōdemne all the frutes in the orchard for wild and naught, & that onlie for this cau­se, that in the beginning of Aprill, no such thinges were vpon the trees, & would in his owne cōceyt, praise the faire moneth of Aprill, for the shining of the Son, the opening of the earth, the gentle raines f [...]om the cloudes, & grene ornaments of [Page] [...] [Page 153] [...] [Page] the ground, which no mā wold denie: but for all the rest of the spring and sommer, if he wold speak few good wordes of thē, & for anger, wold cast away all the frutes of the haruest, should he not declare, Cant. 4. a madd testy kinde of wisedom therein?

And why then, I praie you, in the church of God, which is called in Scripture, and is in dede, his paradise and garden: will you admitt nothing, but that which bud­ded forth in the .vjC. yeares after Christ, as it were in the spring tyde or beginning of sommer? The cōclusions of the valew of the Sacramēt, of the applying thereof, of the accidents, of all other such thinges, they com out of the rote and body of the tree, of that veritie, I meane, which saieth, This is my body: which if you will cōtem­ne, bicause they were not sprongen out vjC. yeares after Christ, you shall be one of the hastings, to speak the lest of you. Where is it readen with in .vjC. yeares of Christ, that oure blessed lady, was prea­ched or named, the mother of mercy, the hand mayden of the Trinitie, the spouse of the holy ghost, the Quene of heauen, [Page 154] the Empresse of hell? yet if you beleue in dede, and in harte, and not saye it only frō the teeth forwarde, that she is the mo­ther of God, necessarely al the other titles folow. Shal I then saie, she was not called the Quene of heauē, or spouse of the ho­ly ghost, in the .vjC. yeares after Christ, ergo she maye not be so called now, and the greatest keye of owr religion is brokē? yet, cōmon sense approueth, that a kinges mother is a Quene, and not of no place, I trow. And thus I trust, M. Iuel, hath no cause to triumph hytherto.

Now for the rest of thinges which do fo­low vnto the end of his sermon, I haue litle minde to declare the falsehood of them, bicause, I am wery, of repeting so many vntruthes of his: one he alone be­trated, being sufficient to confound his loyl [...]ty in misreporting and miscōstruing with libertie. For what reason is this, to saie, that therefor the papistes do not wel an­swer, no masse is priuate, Iuell. seing that in euery [...]asse euery priest doth communicat with an other, where so euer he be: bicause, (saieth M▪ Iuell) by this reason, there should be [...] [Page] excōmunication at all, whereas the party ex­cōmunicated in England, might saie, he wold cōmunicat with the priest which saieth masse in Calicute. For this reason doth proue our sentēce, that wheras the man in England, being excōmunicated, can not communi­cat with the priest in Calicute: ergo the priest of Calicute and England be of one communion and body, so that he which is cutt of from the one, can not remaine in the other, and he which agreeth with the one, agreeth with the other. There­for, it is not with vs M. Iuell, as it is with you: that, if I will not be of the congre­gation of Geneua, I maye go to Witten­berge, and if I like not one citie and fra­ternitie, I maye go to an other. But euen as he, which is in the church of England and a faithfull Catholike, is made parta­ker of the Sacraments and praiers, which be saied in Calicute: so he which is cutt of, and separated, from any one parte and membre of the church, he shall not leap to Calicute, for his cōmunion, but shall remaine quyte diuided from the body. So that as it semeth absurd vnto you (master [Page 155] myne) that an excōmunicate in England should communicate with the priest of Calicute, whether the priest of Calicute will or nill: so make the like argument a­gainst your selfe, that it must seme as ab­surd, that he, which communicateth in England, should not eke communicate with him which is in Calicute, and then shall it remaine that if none receiue with the priest at the aultar in England, yet he cōmunicateth with the priest of Calicut.

Of the like vaine of knowleadge co­meth this other argument also: Iuell. That the name of masse was not vntill foure hundred yeres after Christ: nor yet were the pieces and partes of the masse as we in oure time haue sene thē sett togeather. Ergo wat masse could that be, that as yet, had neither her owne na­me, nor her partes? As who should saie, the masse, which was vsed of the Apostles and their next successours, was made the wor­se by Kyrie eleeson, Gloria in excelsis, Alle­luia, Credo in Deum, and Agnus Dei, with certain most godly collects and praiers, which haue ben added vnto the substance of the sacrifice, which was in the Apost­les [Page] time, not as necessary, but as cōuenient and comly. Do you not know that it is an old and true distinction of the masse, one which was called Catechumenorum, which ended after the Ghospell, and an other masse called Christianorum, which began with the preface? what masse could that be, Iuell. saie you, which as yet had nother her name nor her partes? I answer to this, that she had the essentiall and necessary par­tes frō the beginning but the garnishing and decking of the misteries, did folow afterwardes. Neither doth it hurt and hinder the nature of man, if he haue a new or diuers cote, according to the dis­positiō of the yere. But what do I, which saied I was wery, as I am in dede, and yet do runne forward, with opening his faint and vntrue reasoning? well: nowe I will remembre my selfe better, and conclude with one pointe, which ended, I shall ta­ke my leaue of him and you bothe.

In cōparing S. Iames masse and oures together, it is a world to see, howe frely he foloweth his rhetorike, and fo [...]saketh the verite. A figure of which rhetorike, [Page 156] whiles he did maintaine, with sondry re­portes (of S. Iames masse hath this, and their masse hath this) with this and this, vntill I think, he was wery of speaking, to conclude, Iuell. he sayeth: Sainte Iames masse [...]ad Christes institution, they in their masse, haue, well nere, nothyng ells but mans in­uention. Do yow speak as yow think? is not your communion allmost wholy pe­ced togeather, of the partes of the Po­pish masse by you dismembred? The epi­stle, the Ghospel, the collects of the son­daye, the hymne of the Angels, the con­fession of oure faith, the himne of San­ctus Sanctus Sanctus, the saying of Agnus, be not these so many thinges, in the mas­se, and transferred in to the cōmunion? how then hath the masse, well nere, no­thing but mans inuention, if your com­munion haue Christes only institution? I take it, that M. Iuell did speak so much, onely to saue his honesty, lest he should haue semed not to proue that oure mas­se was cleane contrary vnto S. Iames, ex­cept he would haue borowed this litle lye, of the ignorance and rudenes of the [Page] most part of his audience. But letting the cause of oure masse to cease, hath S. Iames masse, Christ his institution, and hath it no mans inuention, or very litle at all? I think, you do not meane, that he hath nothing els but Christes institu­tion, but as oure masse hath, well nere, nothing els but mans inuentiō: so by the contrary you must meane, S. Iames masse hath, well nere, nothing els but Christes institution. whiche I speake for your ad­uauntage, bycause it serueth better for the Catholikes, that S. Iames masse shold haue nothing els but Christes institutiō. But now Sir, if S. Iames masse be so per­fect a thing in your iudgement, why did not you translate it in to English? It had ben a greate glory for you, to saye that you did bring againe, the very order of the Apostles, and so to proue your saying true, by the masse which S. Iames hym selfe vsed. which thing the Catholikes graunting vnto you (that it is Sainct Ia­mes masse in dede,) with more glory and surety, you might haue turned the Po­pish masse, owt of the church, and haue [Page 157] brought in the masse Apostolike. But yow do not, I think, allow that masse of Sainct Iames. Certainely then you be a great dissembler, to speak so many faire wordes openly of it, and in your hart to disdaine it priuely. No mary, will you saie, Sainct Iames in his masse had Christ his institution. Lett vs then be tried by S. Iames masse, whether you iustely repro­ue the Catholikes masse, and extoll your communion? In the first beginning of Sainct Iames masse, franckincense is bur­ned, with a prayer thereunto appertai­ning. how doth this sauour in yowr no­ses, tell the truth? Further, in that masse the priest goeth vp solemnely with de­uoute praying, the Deacon in the meane tyme singing. Againe in an other place, the Deacon biddeth, that none of them, come in presence of the misteries, which be yet to lerne the faith, or which can not praie with the faithfull (such he mea­neth as haue not fullfilled their penaun­ce) and he commaundeth the dores to be kept. But how agreeth this with that law of yours, which receyueth in, all sortes [Page] without examination, and constrayneth other, which wold not, to come in and be present? Then yet againe, in that masse the priest saieth, O Lorde allmighty king of glory &c, receiue of our handes which be sinners, this per [...]ume, as thou hast receiued those thinges which Abel, Noe, Aaron, and Samuell, and all thy holy ones haue offred vnto the. Further yet in that masse, the priest maketh the signes of the crosse, o­uer the giftes, saying vnto him selfe (Glo­ry be to God on highe and in earth peace, vn­to men good will) three times, and after two other sentences, with bowing him selfe on this side and that side, he sayeth, Magnifie you oure Lorde with me, and lett vs exalt his name together. Also there is in Sainct Iames masse, a secret praier for the priest, when he entreth with in the cur­teynes. further after the consecration and secret praiers, he saieth Hayle Marie full of grace, our Lord is with the. &c. At the last he breaketh the cōsecrated host, holding the halfe in one, the halfe in his othe [...] hand. And that which is in the right hand, he putteth in to the chalice, saying, The [Page 158] vnion of the most holy bodye and precious bloud, of oure Lorde and God and Sauiour Thesus Christ. Then the other part, which was in the left hand, he blesseth, and di­uideth, and putteth it in to chalices, say­ing, it is vnited and sanctified, and cōsumma­ted in the name of the Father and Soun and the Holy Ghost now and euer. I leaue owt manye thinges, as praying vnto Saincts, and also praying for the dead, oft incli­nations and bowinges, oft lifting vp the voyce, oft speaking to hym selfe alone, with incense agayne offred in the later end of the masse. Which masse truly, yf it were in english, and sayed accordingly, it would seme more superstitious and more full of cerimonies & gestures, then the masse which they saye to haue no­thyng, well nere, but mennes inuenti­on. What memories haue these felowes, which so frely report of S. Iames masse, that, which they haue forgotten howe it standeth? or yf memory faile them not, what hartes haue they, to lye so lowdly, and (to the shame of their communion) to crie owt, that Saint Iames masse, hath [Page] Christ his institution, that the people which haue neuer reade it, heard it, or se­ne it, might think it were as prety a thing as the communion is, wheras in dede all thinges being knowen, it vtterly con­foundeth all their craking and glory: ex­cept they haue forgotten that incensing, blessing, crossing, and soft speaking, and saluting of oure blessed lady (all which thinges are vsed in Sainct Iames masse) doe vtterly disagree frō their positions. whereof it foloweth, that he speaketh much against him selfe, which praiseth so highely that masse, whose rites and ce­rimonies do turne their religion to vtter shame and vnworthines. I praye God to send them all better mindes, and not to seke their owne glory, by defending of that, which once they take in hand to maintayne: but the honour of God and his truth, which hath and shall continew for euer. Amen.

Thus then now Sir, you haue a pece of an answer, The auc­thor to his fri [...]d. vnto the stoute chalen­ge, and a token of my good will toward your beneuolence, and some example of [Page 159] the exercise, in the whiche I bestow my solitary and sorowfull time. Of which three poyntes, although euery one sepa­ratly, were sufficient, to haue geuen an occasion to this my labour, and should be available to obtaine easy pardon, for suche thinges which may be amended by the lerned Catholikes: yet chefely I en­tended to destroy the assertions of Ma­ster Iuell. Which if I haue not fully do­ne, yet all is not lost, bicause I haue other prouided a tokē to send to my very frend, or chosen such an exercise, where in I was not vnfrutfully occupied. But on the other side, if I haue attained vnto the cō ­futation of those matters, which I know deserue iust confusion: then haue I that, which I principally sought for▪ and then, as I would be content, that our frendes should haue a sight of it: so would I not be as [...]amed, if the enemies should chaū ­ce to find it. But who is there that is able to saie, that this is so diligently wrought, that it should be welcome to those which do loue vs? or should be accepted for probable of suche as fi [...]d faulte with vs? [Page] Well yet, how so euer it be, I put it in to your handes, to haue and to hold, for better for worse, vntill you see occasion, from it to departe. Fare you well. You know my ordinary commendations, which I vse in all letters. Do them at this tyme extraordinarely, with an ouerplus, bycause it is long, sence I wro­te laste vnto you.