The sum of the conference between John Rainoldes and John Hart touching the head…The summe of the conference betwene Iohn Rainoldes and Iohn Hart touching the head…
The sum of the conference between John Rainoldes and John Hart touching the head and the faith of the Church. Wherein by the way are handled sundry points, of the sufficiency and right expounding of the Scriptures, the ministry of the Church, the function of priesthood, the sacrifice of the mass, with other controversies of religion: but chiefly and purposely the point of Church-government ... Penned by John Rainoldes, according to the notes set down in writing by them both: perused by John Hart, and (after things supplied, & altered, as he thought good) allowed for the faithful report of that which past in conference between them. Whereunto is annexed a treatise entitled, Six conclusions touching the Holy Scripture and the Church, written by John Rainoldes. With a defence of such things as Thomas Stapleton and Gregory Martin have carped at therein.The summe of the conference betwene Iohn Rainoldes and Iohn Hart touching the head and the faith of the Church. Wherein by the way are handled sundrie points, of the sufficiencie and right expounding of the Scriptures, the ministerie of the Church, the function of priesthood, the sacrifice of the masse, with other controuerises of religion: but chiefly and purposely the point of Church-gouernment ... Penned by Iohn Rainoldes, according to the notes set downe in writing by them both: perused by Iohn Hart, and (after things supplied, & altered, as he thought good) allowed for the faithfull report of that which past in conference betwene them. Whereunto is annexed a treatise intitled, Six conclusions touching the Holie Scripture and the Church, writen by Iohn Rainoldes. With a defence of such thinges as Thomas Stapleton and Gregorie Martin haue carped at therein.
John Rainolds 1549–1607Londini: printed by John Wolfe, 1584Londini: printed by Iohn Wolfe, 1584
475, [1], 479-674, 659-750 p. · 304k words · STC 20626 · ESTC S115546
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Rainoldes. But if S. Ambrose meant a stole by orarium, because the Council meant so: then stol• in pthe later writers of those matters must be a woman's garment, because it is so in qIsidore, who lived nearer to them, then did S. Ambrose to the Council. And as for that Council, and the other of Braga: no marvel if the stole be mentioned in them. For they were kept at *that time when rites did steal in upon religion very fast. Though nether was it then half settled in the Mass yet: as by a later rCouncil of Braga may be gathered. Howbeit, if it had been: your proof faileth still. For you may not say that because a Spanish Council speaketh of it, therefore the Church had it by tradition of the Apostles. Unless you will say also, that your shaven crowns ought to be great circles about the whole head by the tradition of the Apostles, and not such little circles on the top of the head only, as now a days are made: because sa Spanish Council condemneth1 the shaving of those little circles as 2a rite of heretics, and alloweth none, but great ones. So far of the stole. There followeth the alb. For which the Deacons alb, so named in the tCouncil of Carthage, maketh nothing. For though the name of alb be derived from alba, by which word the Council doth note a white ⟨p. 598⟩garment, as it were a surplice, forbidding the Deacons to wear it all the service time: yet the thing differeth from your Massing-alb which is peculiar to Priests, as u
Chrysostom, touching [Greek or Hebrew] too. For what soever kind of garment that were: it was common to the Deacons, not proper to the Priests; and therefore not your Massing-alb. Hitherto the holy robe (in
their judgement, who compare the garments of Aaron with yours. But Stapleton, who found that holy robe in Eusebius, might have found withal an other meaning of it by the words following. For he, whose oration Eusebius doth report, telleth Bishops that they are clad with
the holy robe that reached down to the feet, and with the heavenly crown of glory, and with the unction of God, and with the Priestly garment of the holy Ghost. Wherein, as the garment, and unction, and crown do signify spiritual gifts, not things corporal:
Rainoldes. But if S. Ambrose meant a stole by orarium, because the Councell meant so: then stol• in pthe later writers of those matters must be a womans garment, because it is so in qIsidore, who liued néerer to them, then did S. Ambrose to the Councell. And as for that Councell, and the other of Braga: no marueile if the stole be mentioned in them. For they were kept at *that time when rites did steale in upon religion verie fast. Though nether was it then halfe setled in the Masse yet: as by a later rCouncell of Braga may be gathered. Howbeit, if it had béene: your proofe faileth still. For you may not say that because a Spanish Councel speaketh of it, therfore the Church had it by tradition of the Apostles. Unlesse you will say also, that your shauen crownes ought to be great circles about the whole head by the tradition of the Apostles, and not such little circles on the toppe of the head onely, as now a daies are made: because sa Spanish Councell condemneth1 the shauing of those little circles as 2a rite of heretikes, and alloweth none, but great ones. So farre of the stole. There foloweth the albe. For which the Deacons albe, so named in the tCouncell of Carthage, maketh nothing. For though the name of albe be deriued from alba, by which word the Councell doth note a white ⟨p. 598⟩garment, as it were a surplisse, forbidding the Deacōs to weare it all the seruice time: yet the thing differeth from your Massing-albe which is peculiar to Priests, as uthe Canonists also declare on the same worde of the Councell of Carthage. Which difference remoueth your proofe, out of xChrysostome, touching 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 too. For what soeuer kind of garment that were: it was common to the Deacons, not proper to the Priests; and therefore not your Massing-albe. Hitherto the holy robe (in yEusebius,) that reached downe to the feete, should be referred by ztheir iudgement, who compare the garments of Aaron with yours. But Stapleton, who found that holy robe in Eusebius, might haue found withall an other meaning of it by the wordes folowing. For he, whose oration Eusebius doth report, telleth Bishops that they are clad with *the holy robe that reached downe to the feete, and with the heauenly crowne of glorie, and with the vnction of God, and with the Priestly garment of the holy Ghost. Wherein, as the garment, and vnction, and crowne do signifie spirituall giftes, not thinges corporall:
pAlevin. de divin. offic. cap. de vestibus. Amalar. de eccles. offic. lib. 2. cap. 20.Aleuin. de diuin. offic. cap. de vestibus. Amalar. de eccles. offic. lib. 2. cap. 20.
qEtymologiar. lib. 19. cap. 25.
*Above six hundred years after Christ.Aboue sixe hundred years after Christ.
rConcil. Bracarens. 3. cap. 3.
sConcil. Tolet. 4. cap. 40.
1In sol• capitis apice modicum circulum tondent.
2Ritus haereticorum.
tConcil. Carthag. 4. can. 41.
uDist. 93. cap. Diaconus in cónuentu. in glossa. Durand. in Ration divin. offic. lib. 3. cap. 1.Dist. 93. cap. Diaconus in cónuentu. in glossa. Durand. in Ration diuin. offic. lib. 3. cap. 1.
xIn Liturg.
yLib. 10. cap. 4.
zAmalar. de ec•les. offic. lib. 2. cap. 18. Durand. in Rati. on. divin. offic. l. 3. c. 3.Amalar. de ec•les. offic. lib. 2. cap. 18. Durand. in Rati. on. diuin. offic. l. 3. c. 3.
Rainoldes. And what gain you by it, if so much were granted? For you cannot prove by any circumstance of the place, that it must be a Massing-robe. The only show of any such is in your last proof out of the Greek Fathers, Chrysostom, and Basil; or rather, out of the Liturgies, which falsely bear their names; or rather, out of some copies of those Liturgies, wherein are mentioned the amice, the girdle, the chasuble, and the fanel. Howbeit, if a man should sift the Greek words, out of the which you pick these, and confer your amice with their [Greek or Hebrew], your biggin of the head with their shoulder garment, your one cord or fanel with their mo [Greek or Hebrew], your chasuble with their [Greek or Hebrew]: perhaps he should leave the girdle post alone to bind your proof with. And doubtless, in that which is most mask-like, and least beseemeth Christian Pastors at public service, I mean that which the Priest at Mass weareth uppermost, the ⟨p. 599⟩chasuble you call it (I trow) or upper vestiment: the Greek word declareth that you do wrong to the Grecians in matching that of theirs with yours. For the word 1[Greek or Hebrew], by the which their upper vestiment is noted, doth signify a cloak: a garment worn much ( cas single, and ready) by Christians in old time, chiefly by the Grecians, whose Bishops kept it thence belike in solemnities, when other wise they left it off▪ But your upper vestiment is far from that singleness: nor is it like to that common garment, but to a little cottage, (whence it is named 2casula,) closing the Priest round as it were with walls, and having a hole for him to put out his head at, as it were a lover-hole to let out the smoke at.
Rainoldes. And what gaine you by it, if so much were granted? For you cannot proue by any circumstance of the place, that it must be a Massing-robe. The onely shew of any such is in your last proofe out of the Gréeke Fathers, Chrysostome, and Basil; or rather, out of the Liturgies, which falsely beare their names; or rather, out of some copies ofthose Liturgies, wherin are mentioned the amice, the girdle, the chisible, and the fanel. Howbeit, if a man should sift the Gréeke words, out of the which you picke these, and conferre your amice with their 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, your biggin of the head with their shoulder garment, your one coard or fanel with their mo 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, your chisible with their 〈non-Latin alphabet〉: perhaps he should leaue the girdle post alone to binde your proofe with. And doutlesse, in that which is most maske-like, and least beséemeth Christian Pastours at publike seruice, I meane that which the Priest at Masse weareth vppermost, the ⟨p. 599⟩chisible you call it (I trow) or vpper vestiment: the Gréeke word declareth that you doo wrong to the Grecians in matching that of theirs with yours. For the word 1〈non-Latin alphabet〉, by the which their vpper vestiment is noted, doth signifie a cloake: a garment worne much ( cas single, and readie) by Christians in olde time, chiefly by the Grecians, whose Bishops kept it thence belike in solemnities, when other wise they left it off▪ But your vpper vestiment is farre from that singlenes: nor is it like to that common garment, but to a little cottage, (whence it is named 2casula,) closing the Priest round as it were with walles, and hauing a hole for him to put out his head at, as it were a loouer-hole to let out the smoke at.
1Derived from [Greek or Hebrew], (which word S. Paul useth 2. Tim. 4.13.) the same with [Greek or Hebrew] answering t• the Latin, pan•l•.Deriued frō 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, (which worde S. Paule vseth 2. Tim. 4.13.) the same with 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 answering t• the Latin, pan•l•.
cTertullia•. lib. de pallio.
2A diminuti•••t casa ▪ a cottage. The English word, chasuble came (as it seemeth) from that Latin casula, but doth not express the force of it.A diminuti•••t casa ▪ a cottage. The English worde, chisible came (as it seemeth) from that Latine casula, but doth not expre• the force of it.
Hart. If not like our upper vestiment altogether, yet like in that respect that it was close about, dwith a hole for his head in the ••ddes of it. And therefore you need not to scoff in such sort at that kind of vestiment.
Hart. If not like our vpper vestiment altogither, yet like in that respect that it was close about, dwith a hole for his head in the ••ddes of it. And therefore you néede not to scoffe in such sort at that kinde of vestiment.
Rainoldes. If you take the little cottage to be a scoff, it is not my scoff, but your own eDoctors, whose *words I do but open. Your self are rather faulty, who compare your cottage-rag patched by mans brain, with a Priestly robe made by Gods commandment. And yet, in that you match your vestiment with the Jewish for the form of it, I reprove you not. For though there be difference between theirs, and yours, in sundry respects: yet yours were taken up after the example, and made in likeness of theirs. Which is plainly showed by those ancient authors whom I named before, Alcuinus, Amalarius, and Walafridus Strabo. Of whom the ffirst treating of Massing-vestments, saith, that the Church received them 1after the fashion of the Priests of Moses law. The gnext, that our high Priest (he meaneth every Bishop) hath them 2after the rule of Aaron. The hlast, that they came in by little & little: for at the first (saith he) men celebrated Masses in common apparel, as certain of the east Church are said to do till this day. And so he goeth forward showing in particular, how Stephen, and Sylvester, and other Popes, and Prelates did softly bring them in, and some devised this, some that, either to resemble the ⟨p. 600⟩robes of the Jewish Priests, or to note a mystery. To be short, it is showed plainly by them all, that the Massing-vestments of Bishops at that time (which was eight hundred years after Christ) were but eight in number: just as many as Aarons. Whereof the former seven, (for the eighth was proper to Archbishops only) are grown now to be fifteen, more then twice as many. And do you not perceive hereby, M. Hart, how lewdly D. Stapleton allegeth the Fathers, to prove your Massing-vestments all to have been used by the primitive Church? How falsely the Council of Trent doth father them, nor only them but also lights, incense, crossings, and other ceremonies of the Mass on the tradition of the Apostles? And saw I not truly that if you see not how the Christian worship of God in spirit and truth doth differ from the Jewish, and so might succeed it: the cause thereof (by likelihood) is the veil of Popery, which having brought in a Jewish kind of worship doth hide it from your eyes?
Rainoldes. If you take the little cottage to be a scoffe, it is not my scoffe, but your owne eDoctours, whose *wordes I doo but open. Your selfe are rather faultie, who compare your cottage-ragge patched by mans braine, with a Priestly robe made by Gods commandement. And yet, in that you match your vestiment with the Iewish for the forme of it, I reproue you not. For though there be difference betwéene theirs, and yours, in sundrie respectes: yet yours were taken vp after the example, and made in likenes of theirs. Which is plainely shewed by those ancient autours whom I named before, Alcuinus, Amalarius, and Walafridus Strabo. Of whom the ffirst treating of Massing-vestiments, saith, that the Church receiued them 1after the facion of the Priests of Moses law. The gnext, that our hye Priest (he meaneth euery Bishop) hath them 2after the rule of Aarō. The hlast, that they came in by little & little: for at the first (saith he) men celebrated Masses in common apparel, as certaine of the east Church are said to doo till this day. And so hee goeth forward shewing in particular, how Stephen, and Siluester, and other Popes, and Prelats did softly bring them in, and some deuised this, some that, either to resemble the ⟨p. 600⟩roabes of the Iewish Priests, or to note a mysterie. To be short, it is shewed plainely by them all, that the Massing-vestiments of Bishops at that time (which was eight hundred yeares after Christ) were but eight in number: iust as many as Aarons. Whereof the former seuen, (for the eighth was proper to Archbishops onely) are growen now to be fiftéene, more then twise as many. And doo you not perceiue hereby, M. Hart, how lewdly D. Stapleton alleageth the Fathers, to proue your Massing-vestimentes all to haue bene vsed by the primitiue Church? How falsely the Councell of Trent doth father them, nor onely them but also lightes, incense, crossinges, and other ceremonies of the Masse on the tradition of the Apostles? And sawe I not truely that if you see not how the Christian worship of God in spirit and truth doth differ from the Iewish, and so might succeed it: the cause thereof (by likelihood) is the vaile of Popery, which hauing brought in a Iewish kinde of worship doth hide it from your eyes?
eDurand. in r• t•on. divin. offic. lib. 3. cap. 7.Durand. in r• t•on. diuin. offic. lib. 3. cap. 7.
*Casula dicitu• quasi parua casa.
fAlcuin. de divin. offic. cap. de singulis ves•ibus.Alcuin. de diuin. offic. cap. de singulis ves•ibus.
1Ad instar sacerdotum Mosaicae legis.
gAmalar. de ecclesiastic. offic. lib 2. c. 22.
2Ad normam Aaronis.
hWalafrid. St•abo de exord. & incrementis rerum eccles. cap. 24.
For is it not evident that the Jewish 1shadows, that is, the dark lineaments of Christ, as of a picture, which he abolished by his coming as being the image it self and body of them, are drawn out again by the painters of your religion? Or may not he, that hath but half an eye, see, that you surpass the Jews in sundry shows of outward service, and go beyond the priesthood of Aaron in carnal rites? For the most whereof though you have meanings mystical▪ or spiritual matters which they are said to figure in other significations then the Jewish did: yet they set the Church to school with new 2rudiments after a Jewish manner, and press it with that bondage from which the Lord hath made it free. Wherefore, were they taken from the Jews, or not: yet in respect of us, on whom God hath not laid them, they are of 3the commandments & doctrines of men. And we may justly say of them, now being bred, the same, that S· mAustin said, when they were breeding: Although it can not be found in what sense they are against the faith, yet religion it self which God of his mercy would have to be free under 5very few and most manifest ceremonies of divine service, is by them oppressed so with servile burdens, that the case and state of the Jews is more tolerable; who although they have not acknowledged the time of liberty, yet are they […] with the packs of Gods law, not with the devises and ⟨p. 601⟩presumptions of men.
For is it not euident that the Iewish 1shadowes, that is, the darke lineaments of Christ, as of a picture, which he abolished by his coming as being the image it selfe and body of them, are drawne out againe by the painters of your religion? Or may not he, that hath but halfe an eye, sée, that you surpasse the Iewes in sundrie shewes of outwarde seruice, and go beyond the priesthood of Aaron in carnall rites? For the most whereof though you haue meanings mysticall▪ or spiritual matters which they are saide to figure in other significations then the Iewish did: yet they set the Church to schoole with new 2rudiments after a Iewish maner, and presse it with that bondage from which the Lord hath made it frée. Wherefore, were they taken from the Iewes, or not: yet in respect of vs, on whom God hath not laide them, they are of 3the commandements & doctrines of men. And we may iustly say of them, now being bredde, the same, that S· mAustin saide, when they were bréeding: Although it can not be found in what sense they are against the faith, yet religion it selfe which God of his mercy would haue to bee free vnder 5very few and most manifest ceremonies of diuine seruice, is by them o•pressed so with seruile burdens, that the case and state of the Iewes is more tolerable; who although they haue not acknowledged the time of libertie, yet are they 〈…〉 with the packes of Gods law, not with the deuises and ⟨p. 601⟩presumptions of men.
Hart. It is a calumnious speech that our ceremonies are shadows, or rudiments, or keep the Church in bondage as the Jewish did. For theirs were very many, cumbersome, & dark: ours are v•ry few, easy, and significant. As S. nAustin saith, that since that our liberty hath shined most brightly by Christs resurrection, we are not laden with a heavy charge of signs, as were the Jews: but our Lord himself and the Apostolic discipline hath delivered to us 2some few in steed of many, and them most easy to be done, most honourable for signification, most clean and pure to be observed. But you would have (me thinks) no ceremonies at all: for you said that the worship of God amongst Christians is spiritual merely.
Hart. It is a calumnious spéech that our ceremonies are shadowes, or rudiments, or kéepe the Church in bondage as the Iewish did. For theirs were very many, combersome, & darke: ours are v•ry few, easie, and significant. As S. nAustin saith, that since that our libertie hath shined most brightly by Christs resurrection, we are not laden with a heauie charge of signes, as were the Iewes: but our Lord himselfe and the Apostolike discipline hath deliuered to vs 2some few in steed of many, and them most easie to be doon, most honorable for signification, most cleane and pure to be obserued. But you would haue (me thinkes) no ceremonies at all: for you saide that the worship of God amongst Christians is spirituall meerely.
nDe doctrin• Christ. lib. 3. cap. 9.
2Quaedam p•uca pro multis, eadem•ue factu facillima.
Rainoldes. I spake in comparison of the Jewish worship: or rather Christ, not I. For they are his words, that oGod will be worshipped now in spirit and truth. Which must needs be meant of mere spiritual worship: sith the reason following, that pGod is a spirit, doth show that the Jews did worship him in spirit too. And yet is that spoken in comparison, as I said. For Christ him self ordained two principal ceremonies, which we call the sacraments, his qSupper, and his rBaptism. And the Church-assemblies, swhich are helps most necessary for us to learn and practise that spiritual worship, must have their time, when; their place, where; their manner, how; things to be directed twith comeliness and order, in rites fit uto edify. But these are few in number and clear in signification. So few, that they are nothing in comparison of the Jewish: so clear, that they do lively represent Christ, and are no dark shadows. Now whether that your Popish ceremonies have kept this fewness, and clearness.
Rainoldes. I spake in comparison of the Iewish worship: or rather Christ, not I. For they are his wordes, that oGod will be worshipped now in spirit and truth. Which must néedes be meant of meere spirituall worship: sith the reason folowing, that pGod is a spirit, doth shew that the Iewes did worship him in spirit too. And yet is that spoken in comparison, as I saide. For Christ him selfe ordeined two principall ceremonies, which we call the sacraments, his qSupper, and his rBaptisme. And the Church-assemblies, swhich are helpes most necessarie for vs to learne and practise that spirituall worship, must haue their time, when; their place, where; their maner, how; things to be directed twith coomelinesse and order, in rites fit uto edifie. But these are few in number and cléere in signification. So few, that they are nothing in comparison of the Iewish: so cléere, that they do liuely represent Christ, and are no darke shadowes. Now whether that your Popish ceremonies haue kept this fewnes, and cléerenes.
Hart. Perhaps you mean because we have seven sacraments, and not two only. But the Fathers, as namely S. Austin (though xyour men allege him to the contrary,) do name other sacraments beside the Lords Supper (as you call it) and Baptism.
Hart. Perhaps you meane because we haue seuen sacraments, and not two onely. But the Fathers, as namely S. Austin (though xyour men alleage him to the contrary,) doo name other sacraments beside the Lordes Supper (as you call it) and Baptisme.
Hart. Yet he nameth more then your two sacraments. And ⟨p. 602⟩the rest of ours are proved by other Fathers. Whereupon the zCouncil of Trent hath defined that there are seven sacraments of the new law, neither more, nor fewer: & they all are sacraments truly and properly.
Hart. Yet he nameth more then your two sacraments. And ⟨p. 602⟩the rest of ours are proued by other Fathers. Whereupon the zCouncell of Trent hath defined that there are seuen sacraments of the new law, neither more, nor fewer: & they all are sacraments truly and properly.
Rainoldes. The aFathers do commonly use the word [sacrament] for a mystery or sign of a holy thing. And so you may prove seven and twenty sacraments by them, as well as seven. Which is manifest by S. bAustin, whom you pretend herein most. For as he giveth the name of sacrament to cmarriage, to dthe ordering of ministers, to elaying on of hands, and freconciling of the repentant: so he giveth it to gEaster, and to the Lords day, hto the sanctifying and iinstructing of novices in the faith, the feeding, the signing, the catechizing of them, the making of prayers, the singing of Psalms, and so forth to other holy rites and actions. But as the word [sacrament] is taken in a straiter signification, to note the visible signs instituted by Christ for the assurance and increase of grace in the faithful, which is the sense of it both with kyou, and lus, when we speak of sacraments: so doth mhe name those two, as principal ones, by an excellency; and, when nthere issued blood and water out of Christs side, othese are *the two sacraments (saith he) of the Church, meaning the Lords supper by blood, by water baptism. Yea, the Schoolmen them selves, who were the first authors that did raise them up to the precise number of seven, no more, nor fewer; for you ••nde it not in any of the Fathers or other writers whatsoever before a thousand years after Christ: but the Schoolmen them selves have showed that the seven are not all sacraments, if the name of sacrament be taken properly and straitly. For neither can marriage so be of the number, as pDurand proveth well: neither confirmation (the chrism of oil and balm) as qBonaventure teacheth. And, to be short, their captain rAlexander of Ales doth avouch expressly, that there are 1only two principal sacraments, 2which Christ himself did institute: so that (by his confession) as we speak of sacraments, there are two only. But my meaning was not to blame you for seven. I spake of all your ceremonies, which are (I may say boldly) seventy times seven. ⟨p. 603⟩Which whether that they be so few, and so clear in comparison of the Jewish, as I have declared and you confess that Christian ceremonies should be: let the learned judge by comparing of your Church-books, chiefly the sCeremonial, tPontifical, and uMissal, with xthe books of Moses. Let the unlearned guess by the store and strangeness of sacrificing vestments:
Rainoldes. The aFathers doo commonly vse the word [sacrament] for a mystery or signe of a holy thing. And so you may proue seuen and twentie sacraments by them, as well as seuen. Which is manifest by S. bAustin, whom you pretend herein most. For as he giueth the name of sacrament to cmariage, to dthe ordering of ministers, to elaying on of hands, and freconci••ng of the repentant: so he giueth it to gEaster, and to the Lords day, hto the sanctifying and iinstructing of nouices in the faith, the feeding, the signing, the catechizing of them, the making of prayers, the singing of Psalmes, and so forth to other holy rites and actions. But as the worde [sacrament] is taken in a straiter signification, to note the visible signes inistuted by Christ for the assurance and increase of grace in the faithfull, which is the sense of it both with kyou, and lvs, when we speake of sacraments: so doth mhe name those two, as principall ones, by an excellencie; and, when nthere issued blood and water out of Christes side, othese are *the two sacraments (saith he) of the Church, meaning the Lordes supper by blood, by water baptisme. Yea, the Schoolemen them selues, who were the first autours that did raise them vp to the precise number of seuen, no more, nor fewer; for you nde it not in any of the Fathers or other writers whatsoeuer before a thousand yeares after Christ: but the Schoolemen them selues haue shewed that the seuen are not all sacraments, if the name of sacrament be taken properly and straitly. For neither can mariage so be of the number, as
aTertullian. aduers. Judae. & contr. Marcion. lib. 5. Hilar. in Matthae. can. 12. & 13. Leo epist. 10.11.12.13. & passim.Tertullian. aduers. Iudae. & contr. Marcion. lib. 5. Hilar. in Matthae. can. 12. & 13. Leo epist. 10.11.12.13. & passim.
bEpist. 5. ad Marcellin. De civit. Dei lib. 10. cap. 5. Contr. aduers. leg. & Prophetarum lib. 2. cap. 9.Epist. 5. ad Marcellin. De ciuit. Dei lib. 10. cap. 5. Contr. aduers. leg. & Prophetarum lib. 2. cap. 9.
cAugust. de bono coniug. c. 18.
dContr. epist. Parmenian. lib. 2. cap. 13.
eDe baptism. contr. Donatist. lib. 5. cap. 20.
fDe adulteri•. coniug. cap. 26. & 28.
gEpist. 23. ad Bonifacium.
hDe peccat. merit. & remission. l. 2. cap. 26.
iDe symb. ad ca•echumen. lib. 4. cap. 1.
kConcil. Trident. Sess. 7. in pro•m. & de Sacrament. in gen. can. 1.
lArticuli religion. eccles. Anglican. cap. de Sacramentis.
mDe doctrin. Christian. l. 3. c. 9. Epist. 11•. ad Januar▪ cap. 1.De doctrin. Christian. l. 3. c. 9. Epist. 11•. ad Ianuar▪ cap. 1.
whereof ytheir common Priests had three, yours have six; their high Priest had eight, your Bishops have fifteen at least, and some sixteen, beside zthe Popes prerogative-robes. And so, to leave this matter to their consideration: your own confession, yieldeth enough for my purpose touching the place of Malachi. For if the spiritual worshipping of God, wherewith the Jews did serve him, had ceremonies in number more, in signification darker, then it hath amongst the Gentiles: this kind of serving him with fewer ceremonies & clearer is proper to the Gentiles, & might succeed that which was amongst the Jews. Wherefore D. Allen's third, & fourth reasons, whereby he would prove that the offering spoken of in Malachi the Prophet must signify the outward sacrifice of the Mass, and not spiritual sacrifices, can take no hold against us. No more then ours could take against you of the contrary, if we should conclude that it must betoken a spiritual worship not outward offerings on an altar, because outward offerings are common to the Jews with us, and this is proper to the Gentiles: and this should succeed the Jewish worship of God, and come in stead of it, which no outward offerings and sacrifices can do, sith they are coupled always to Gods spiritual worship. Would you allow these reasons?
whereof ytheir common Priests had thrée, yours haue sixe; their high Priest had eight, your Bishops haue fiftéene at least, and some sixtéene, beside zthe Popes prerogatiue-robes. And so, to leaue this matter to their consideration: your owne confession, yeldeth enough for my purpose touching the place of Malachie. For if the spiritual worshipping of God, wherewith the Iewes did serue him, had ceremonies in number more, in signification darker, then it hath amongst the Gentiles: this kinde of seruing him with fewer ceremonies & cléerer is proper to the Gentils, & might succeede that which was amongst the Iewes. Wherefore D. Allens third, & fourth reasons, whereby he would proue that the offering spokē of in Malachie the Prophet must signify the outward sacrifice of the Masse, and not spirituall sacrifices, can take no holde against vs. No more then ours could take against you of the contrarie, if we should conclude that it must betoken a spirituall worship not outward offeringes on an altar, because outward offeringes are common to the Iewes with vs, and this is proper to the Gentiles: and this should succéede the Iewish worship of God, and come in steede of it, which no outward offeringes and sacrifices can doo, sith they are coopled alwayes to Gods spirituall worship. Would you allow these reasons?
which Christ himselfe did institute: so that (by his confession) as we speake of sacraments, there are two only. But my meaning was not to blame you for seuen. I spake of all your ceremonies, which are (I may say boldly) seuentie times seuen.
⟨p. 603⟩
Which whether that they be so few, and so cléere in comparison of the Iewish, as I haue declared and you confesse that Christian ceremonies should be: let the learned iudge by comparing of your Church-bookes, chiefly the
sSacrarum ceremoniarum Romanae ecclesiae libri tres.
tPontifical Romanum in tres distinctum parts.Pontificale Romanum in tres distinctum partes.
uMissal Romanum, in rubricis Missalis, ritibus celebrā di Missam, & defectibus circa Missam occurrent•bus.Missale Romanum, in rubricis Missalis, ritibus celebrā di Missam, & defectibus circa Missam occurrent•bus.
xExodus, Leviticus, and Numbers.Exodus, Leuiticus, and Numbers.
