Two very learned sermons of M. Beza, together with a short sum of the…Two very lerned sermons of M. Beza, togither with a short sum of the…

1 First, for the name of Transubstantiation, I fear not to affirm, that it is very new and never heard of, before the days of pope Innocent the third, who was about the year of our Lord, 1205, much less was it confirmed as an article of faith, before the Council of Lateran, which was kept and holden in his days. And though we might by authority of good historiographers, make it yet somewhat more new, namely, that it was not ratified as an article of religion, till the Council kept at Constance, a city so named in Germany, in the days of Pope ⟨p. 170⟩John the 23, which was about the year of our Lord,¹ 1415. Yet to gratify them, we will grant it, to be as old, as the council of Lateran in Rome, held in the year 1215, than the which also their own writers will not prescribe further. But alas what get they hereby, namely, that this their dotage and dream of transubstantiation, at the least, in the name of it, hath not so many grey hairs on the head, or years on the back of it, as they would bear the world in hand it hath, for, as by computation it may appear, it is but 300 & do years old. Neither will that shift serve, that they flee to here, to wit, that though the term were not till then, yet the matter was before. A very likely thing forsooth, as though the fathers of the Greek and Latin churches, so well skilled in those several languages, had not bin able aswell to have delivered the word as the matter. In points of greater consequence than this by far, they had their peculiar and significant words, as trinity, harmonously, hypostasis, and such like, and yet in this they must fail forsooth, to the end, that the glory of new invention or forgery rather may be ascribed to some other. But to conclude ⟨p. 171⟩•his point: If papists under a false cloak of novelty, will not spare to reject, not only old, but good and true things also, then much more may we, and that upon good ground refuse this fantasy, not only because it is new, but also because it is false, as shall (god willing) hereafter more fully appear.

1 First, for the name of Transubstantiation, I feare not to affirme, that it is verye newe and neuer heard of, before the days of pope Innocent the third, who was about the yeare of our Lorde, 1205, much lesse was it confirmed as an article of faith, before the Councell of Laterane, which was kept and holden in his dayes. And though wee might by authoritie of good historiographers, make it yet somewhat more new, namely, that it was not ratified as an article of religion, till the Councell kept at Constance, a citie so named in Germanie, in the dayes of Pope