offended withal ? I acknowledge that the mystery hereof is otherwise of some declared, and of all to this end, to put us in mind of the benefits purchased to us by Christ in his body.



De Consec.
Dist. 2.

M. Harding, of good policy to win credit, fathereth all his mystical fantasies

upon the apostles. Of Sergius the first it is written, that he devised the Agnus Urspergensis.

Dei to be sung at the breaking and distribution of the mysteries?; but of the breaking of the same in three parts, notwithstanding it be strongly avouched by M. Harding, yet of Sergius the first there is written nothing. Indeed, Gratian allegeth this decree in the name of Sergius the pope, but without date or any manner further addition. And therefore it may as well be Sergius the second, that was called 08 Porci, or Sergius the third, that took Formosus his predecessor, being dead, out of the grave, and beheaded him, and threw out his carcase into the Tiber. Therefore this matter, for ought that may appear, beareth small certainty.

But let us grant that Gratian meant Sergius the first; yet was he well near seven hundred years after Christ. Neither were it any great inconvenience to say, that, as he was able to devise these mystical significations, so he was also able to devise the number of parts and manner of breaking. But what great mysteries there may be in this breaking of outward forms and accidents, that M. Harding imagineth, I leave unto himself to consider.

The fable of Amphilochius hath been six times alleged by M. Harding in this one book, to sundry purposes; and yet he himself knoweth it is but a very peevish fable. Whoso listeth to know it further, may find it answered in the first article, and in the thirty-third division?.

But, where as this Sergius saith, Triforme est corpus Domini, “The body of our Lord is of three forms;" whatsoever his meaning therein were, his speech is very strange, or rather monstrous. For the body of Christ is not of so many forms, but only one, and uniform. One of these portions, saith Sergius, signifieth Christ after his resurrection; the second, Christ walking in the earth; the third, Christ lying in his grave. All this, saith M. Harding, is holy and mystical.

Howbeit, some there were that liked not so greatly these imaginations, and Durand. Lib. therefore of themselves devised others. Some said, the first part signifieth the

saints in heaven; the second, the faithful that be alive; the third, the souls in purgatory. Some say, these three parts signify the three states of Christ, mortal, dead, and immortal : some, that they signify the three substantial parts of Christ, his Godhead, his soul, and his body: some others, that they signify the three Persons in the Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost 3. And I marvel there was none that could say they signify the three patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Thus, having utterly lost the very use of the

, breaking of the mysteries, they retain a bare ceremony thereof; and yet are so far out of knowledge of the same, that they cannot agree among themselves what to make of it; I mean, neither what they break, nor wherefore they break it. This Sergius disagreeth from Bonaventura, from Durandus, and all others; yet he liketh M. Harding best of all.

“ And what hurt,” saith he, “is there herein? Or wherefore should any man herewith be offended ?" Verily, in the house of God that thing is hurtful that doth no good. All the ceremonies of the church ought to be clear, and lively, and

iv. cap. liii.

nens, corpus jacens in sepulchro; quia usque ad finem sæculi corpora sanctorum in sepulchris erunt.-Serg. Papa in Corp. Jur. Canon. Lugd. 1624. Decret. Gratian. Decr. Tert. Pars, Dist. Ü. can. 22. col. 1921.]

[Constituit præterea ut in fractione dominici corporis caneretur, Agnus Dei, &c.-Plat. Vit. Pontif. Col. 1561. Serg. I. p. 91. See also Chron. Abbat. Ursperg. Argent. 1537. p. 163.]

[? See before, pages 189, &c.]

[...aiunt quidam quod tres partes hostiæ tres status beatorum figurant: scilicet qui sunt in cælo: qui in purgatorio : et qui in mundo versantur...frangitur in tres partes. Primo in memoriam Trinitatis. Secundo, in memoriam triplicis status Christi. Primus, fuit in hominibus manens. Secundus, fuit mortuus in sepulchro jacens. Tertius, est immortalis, in cælo existens, &c.—Durand. Rat. Div. Offic. Lugd. 1565. Lib. iv. cap. li. 8, 20. foll. 195, 6. 2.]

able to edify. And if this mystical ceremony be not hurtful, why then doth M. 1 Cor. xiv. Harding himself break it ? and that, not of ignorance or oblivion, but wittingly and willingly, and as often as he saith his mass ? For Sergius saith one of the three portions ought to be reserved upon the altar until the mass be donet; but M. Harding, contrary both to Sergius, and also to his mystical significations, receiveth all the parts together, and reserveth none, and that by the warrant of the gloss in that places, which is quite contrary to the text. Why doth he thus De Conseer. dissemble, and so openly mock the world ? If this ceremony be good, why doth form. in he break it? If it be ill, why would he have us to keep it ?

The guess that M. Harding useth herein seemeth very simple: Pope Sergius devised these mystical meanings seven hundred years after the apostles' time; ergo, this order of breaking came from the apostles.

Dist. 2. Tri


[blocks in formation]


Now that this custom or mystical ceremony was not first ordained by Sergius, for ought that can be gathered, but of him expounded only touching the mystery of it, as used before his time from the beginning of the church, no one, ancient council or author found upon whom it may be fathered, of good reason, sith it hath (184) generally been observed, we may refer the institution of it to the apostles; The hundred

and eighty. and that according to the mind of St Augustine, whose notable saying for that fourthurybehalf is this : Quod universa tenet ecclesia, nec [in] conciliis constitutum, sed or it was semper retentum est, non nisi auctoritate apostolica traditum rectissime credi- never genes. tur. “ What,saith he, the universal church keepeth, neither hath been ordained ed. in councils, but hath always been observed, of good right we believe it hath been delivered (to the church) as a tradition by the authority of the apostles.

To conclude, if any spark of godliness remain in our deceived countrymen and brethren, they will not scorn and despise this ancient ceremony of dividing the sacrament in three parts at the blessed sacrifice of the mass, whereof any occasion of evil is not only not ministered, but rather, contrariwise, whereby we are admonished and stirred to tender our own souls' health, and to render thanks to God for the great benefit of our redemption.



There is no mention made, neither in old father nor in ancient council, of this manner of breaking of the sacrament; ergo, saith M. Harding, it came first undoubtedly from the apostles. The contrary hereof were much more likely. For he might rather have said thus: There is no mention made of it in any old father or council; therefore it came not from the apostles.

And, where as he saith, “ It hath been every where universally observed;" it is a great untruth, as, God willing, it shall appear. And therefore St Augustine's rule serveth nothing to this purpose.

For, first, as M. Harding is deceived in the manner of breaking, so is he also deceived in the quantity of the bread, imagining it was a little thin round cake, such as of late hath been used in the church of Rome: Which, Durandus Durand. Lib. saith, must be round like a penny; either because Judas betrayed Christ for some like kind of coin, or because it is written: Domini est terra, et plenitudo ejus : “The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof 10.” But indeed it was a great cake, so large and so thick, that all the congregation might receive of it. Durandus himself saith : In primitiva ecclesia ... offerebant unum magnum panem, Durand. Lib.

iv. in sexta parte canon.

iv. cap. liii.

[Serg. Papa in Corp. Jur. Canon. Decret. Gratian. Decr. Tert. Pars, Dist. ii. can. 22. col. 1921. See before, page 585, note 13.]

[* Hodie non servantur, sed duæ partes siccæ comeduntur.-Gloss. in eod. ibid.)

[6 The first institution, H. A. 1564.] [? 1565 omits the.]

[8 August. Op. Par. 1679-1700. De Bapt. contr. Donatist. Lib. iv. cap. xxiv. 31. Tom. IX. col. 140; where institutum.]

[° Soul, 1565, and H. A. 1564.)

[1° Durand. Rat. Div. Offic. Lib. iv. capr. xxx. 8. xli. 8. foll. 139, 162. 2. See before, page 15, note 15.]

Lit. Chrysost.


in S. Germ.

Lib. iv.
August. ad


Inter Ep.

Basil. ad

iv. cap. xv.

et omnibus sufficientem : quod adhuc Græci servare dicunturl: “In the primitive church they offered one great cake that was sufficient for all the people; which thing, they say, the Greeks do continue still.” In Chrysostom's liturgy or communion we see both the form of the bread, and also the order of cutting or

dividing it with a knife. Gentianus Hervetus, in the description thereof, saith : Gent. Hervet. Est... panis ... crassus, et fermentatus, [et] figura propemodum sphærica 3 : “It is Rer. Eccles. a thick cake, and leavened, and of form in manner round.” It appeareth by Gregor . Dial. St Gregory, that it was a great cake, such as men used commonly at their

tables * ; which thing appeareth also by that the heretics called artotyritæ added Quod vult.

cheese unto it, and so ministered the communion in bread and cheese5. And Epiph.

Paulinus, sending such a cake unto St Augustine, sent also this greeting withal : August. Panem unum, quem unanimitatis indicio misimus caritati tuæ, rogamus [ut] acciEpist. 31.

piendo benedicas 6 : “ This one loaf or cake, which I have sent unto you in token

of unity, I beseech you, receiving the same, to bless it.” And perhaps Ignatius Ignat. ad in respect hereof said : Unus est panis pro omnibus fractus?: “ There is one

loaf or cake broken for all.” And St Basil : Idem est virtute, sive unam partem quis accipiat a sacerdote, sive plures partes simul 8: “It is all one in effect,

, whether a man take one only part of the priest, or many parts together.” It

is likely he useth these words “part” and “parts” in respect of one whole. DuDurand. Lib. randus saith that in his time “the priest in some churches, dividing the

sacrament into three portions, received one himself, and ministered the other two to the deacon and subdeacon9.” The like is recorded by Alexander de Hales, and sundry others. All this M. Harding dissembleth and passeth by, and seeth nothing but a mystical ceremony.

Now, this cake being so large, so thick, and so massy, and able to suffice so many, we may not well think that the priest could conveniently divide it into three parts, and receive all alone. But rather, as I have already said, the breaking thereof is an invincible proof of the holy communion, and a manifest condemnation of M. Harding's private mass. For it was not divided into parts, to the end to signify these mystical fantasies, that M. Harding and others have imagined, but to be distributed and delivered to the people. Clemens Alexan

drinus saith : Etiam eucharistiam, cum quidam, ut mos est, diriserint, permittunt mat. Lib. i. unicuique ex populo partem ejus sumere 10 : “ After that certain (that is, the priests)

have divided the sacrament, they suffer every of the people to take a portion of

it.” So St Augustine saith: Ad distribuendum comminuiturll: “It is broken that Paul. Epist.

it may be distributed.” And again : Confringunt oblationes in eucharistiam 12 : August. ad Quodvult

• They divide the oblations into the sacrament” (that the people may commuOphitis.

nicate). So Dionysius : Velatum ... panem in multa concidens, et unitatem calicis omnibus impertiens 13 : “ Dividing the bread, that stood covered, into many parts, and delivering the unity of the cup unto all the people.” In St Basil's communion, taken out of the Syrian tongue, it is written thus : Sacerdos frangit, et signat: diaconus proclamat, Communionem 14 : “ The priest breaketh and signeth

Alex. de
Hales, in 4.
Quæst. 37.

Alex. Stro-

[ocr errors]

August. ad



deum. De

Dionys. Eccles. Hierarch. cap, jij. Lit. Basil.

[Id. ibid. cap. liii. 3. fol. 199. 2; where enim for unum.]

[ Chrysost. Lit. in Lit. Sanct. Patr. Par. 1560, pp. 72, 3.)

[Gent. Hervet. ad Lect. ad calc. Lit. Sanct. Patr. fol. 35. 2; where utpote fermentatus.]

[* Tunc duas secum oblationum coronas detulit. Gregor. Magni Papæ I. Op. Par. 1705. Dial. Lib. iv. cap. lv. Tom. II. col. 464; where see note. Conf. Bingham, Orig. Eccles. Book xv. chap. ii. 5, 6.)

[* August. Op. Par. 1679—1700. Ad Quodvultd. Lib. de Hær. 28. Tom. VIII. col. 10.

Epiph. Op. Par. 1622. Adv. Hær. Lib. 11. Hær. xlix. 2. Tom. I. p. 418.]

{© Paulin. Epist. xxv. 5. in August. Op. Tom. II. col. 38.]

[? Ignat. Interp. Epist. ad Philad. cap. iv. in Cotel. Patr. Apostol. Amst. 17:24. Tom. II. p. 77.)

18 Basil. Op. Par. 1721-30. Ad Cæsar, Patric. Epist. xciii. Tom. III. p. 187.]

[° Sane sacerdos ipse omnes partes hostiæ comedit. In quibusdam tamen ecclesiis ipse unam partem sumit: et reliquam eucharistiæ medietatem super patenam in duas partes dividit, quas ministris, scilicet diacono et subdiacono, comedendas impendit. -Durand. Rat. Div. Offic. Lugd. 1565. Lib. iv. cap. liv. 3. foll. 200, 1.]

[° Clement. Alex. Op. Oxon. 1715. Stromat. Lib. I. Tom. I. p. 318. See before, page 153, note 14.)

[" August. Op. Ad Paulin. Epist. cxlix. 16. Tom. II. col. 509.]

["2 Id. ad Quodvultd. Lib. de Hær. 17. Tom. VIII. col. 8. in Not. The Benedictine editors exclude this from the text, as not supported by manuscript authority.)

(13 Dionys. Areop. Op. Antv. 1634. De Eccles. Hierarch. cap. iii. 3. Tom. I. p. 299.]

[14 Basil. Lit. ex Syr. Vers. in Cassandr, Op. Par. 1616. Liturg. cap. ix. p. 26.]

[ocr errors]

1 Cor. x.




Lib. iii.

(the sacrament): the deacon crieth aloud, The communion.” And what needeth the witness of so many? St Paul saith : Panis, quem frangimus, nonne commu- 1 Cor. x. nicatio corporis Christi est ? “ The bread that we break, is it not the communication of the body of Christ ?” Which words Anselmus expoundeth thus : Panis, quem nos sacerdotes ... frangimus, et quem unum in multas partes dividi- Anselm. in mus, ad designandam caritatem accipientium 15: The bread that we, being priests, do break, and which bread, being one cake, we divide into many portions, to express the love (or unity) of the receivers.” Likewise Lorichius: Panis, quem frangimus, participatio Domini est; hoc est, fractio significat, nos esse unum corpus Prorogaand. “ The bread that we break is the participation of the Lord; that is to say, the breaking 17 signifieth that all we are one body.” It appeareth hereby that the sacrament was thus divided into parts, not to the intent we should thereby learn new mysteries, but that the people might receive it.

To be short, this ceremony of three portions so broken and so received cannot be found neither in the scriptures, nor in any of the old fathers or councils : it beareth witness both against transubstantiation and also against private mass : the best learned of that side cannot yet agree, neither whence it sprang first, nor what it meaneth: the people neither seeth it nor knoweth it: they themselves that so highly would seem to favour it, contrary both to Sergius' decree, and also to his mystical exposition, in their masses daily and openly are bold to break it. Now hast thou, good christian reader, hereof indifferently to judge, whether M. Harding or his countrymen be deceived. Verily St Augustine saith: “If the causes August. ad that first moved and led men to devise such ceremonies can hardly or not at all Epist. 119. be known, whensoever opportunity is offered, let them be cut off and abolished without staggering 18.

[15 Anselm. Op. Col. Agrip. 1612. In 1. Epist. ad Cor. cap. x. Tom. II. p. 140; where unionem caritatis.]

[ 16 Ger. Lorich. De Miss. Pub. Prorogand. 1536. Lib. ill. pp. 282, 3.)

[17 Bread, 1565.]

[18 Omnia itaque talia... ut vix aut omnino numquam inveniri possint caussæ, quas in eis instituendis homines secuti sunt, ubi facultas tribuitur, sine ulla dubitatione resecanda existimo.-August. Op. Ad Inq. Januar. Lib. 11. seu Epist. lv. 35. Tom. II. col. 142.]





Or that whosoever had said the sacrament is a figure, a pledge, a token, or a remembrance of Christ's body, had therefore been judged for an heretic.



[blocks in formation]

For M. Hard.


ten ; and

In this article we do agree with M. Jewel in some respect. For we confess it cannot be avouched by scripture, ancient council, doctor, or example of the primi

tive church, that whosoever had said the sacrament is a figure, a pledge, a token, The hundred or a remembrance of Christ's body, had therefore been judged for an heretic. (185) fifth untruth. No man of any learning ever wrote so unlearnedly. Much less, to impute heresy to ing's own any man for saying thus hath been any of the highest mysteries or greatest keys of fello na hore our religion; with which untruth M. Jewel goeth about to deface the truth. Wherefore so and wait this article seemeth to have been put in either of malice toward the church, or of learnedly. there are un ignorance, or only to fill up the heap for lack of better stuff. Perusing the works of

the ancient and learned fathers, we find that oftentimes they call the sacrament? a figure, a sign, a token, a mystery, a sampler. The words of them used to this purpose in their learned tongues are these: figura, signum, symbolum, mysterium, exemplar, årtitutov, imago, &c. By which they mean not to diminish the truth of Christ's body in the sacrament, but to signify the secret manner of this 3 being in the same.

THE BISHOP OF SARISBURY. It appeareth that these men's doctrine is much mutable, and subject to change. For, notwithstanding they be now grown into some better liking of these terms, figure, sign, signification, token, &c.; yet not long sithence they seemed to be otherwise resolved, and thought themselves able to allege Theophy

lactus, Damascenus, Euthymius, and other great matter, to disprove the same. Cuth. Tonst. D. Tonstal, the more to make the matter odious, saith thus :

“ If the sacrament be a figure of Christ's body, then was a figure crucified for us, and not

Christ4.” And whatsoever they were that used this word figura in this matter Marcus Con- of the sacrament, D. Stephen Gardiner scornfully calleth them figuratores5,

“figurers." And M. John White, late schoolmaster, and after bishop of Winton, writeth thus in great scorn against that most reverend learned father, D. Peter Martyr, touching the same:

Audio mille locis 'corpus;' non audio, Petre,

Signa, troposque, tuo nec symbola nata cerebro 6 : “I hear 'body, body,' in a thousand places; but of signs, figures, tokens, that came only out of thy head, I hear nothing.” Which words notwithstanding, in all the ancient learned fathers, by M. Harding's own confession, if he had had ears to hear, he might have heard. Therefore it was neither malice, nor ignorance, nor increase of heap, nor want of other stuff, but the fondness and folly of M. Harding's side, that added this article to the rest.

de Euch. Lib. i.


[' 1565 omits for.] [? Sacraments, 1565.]
[ His, 1565, and H. A. 1564.)

[" Tonst. De Verit. Corp. et Sang. Dom, in Euch.
Lut. 1554. Lib. 1. foll. 12, 15, 29. 2.]

[5 Confut. Cavill. in Ven. Fuch. Sacr. Verit. Par. 1552. Ad Object. 13, fol. 18. 2.)

[ Whit. Diacosio-Mart. Lond. 1553. Gregor. Secund. fol. 42. 2.]

« VorigeDoorgaan »