Being come to the matter in hand,1 you show your self more hot and hasty in words, then discrete or pithy in your arguments. For that I said it is a contradiction, ⟨p. 178⟩to maintain that one and the same body should together both be visible & invisible, circumscriptible and incircumscriptible, as you do most fondly imagine and teach of Christs body, you charge me with infidelity for denying gods omnipotency, which every Christian professeth in the first article of the Creed. Of Atheism and infidelity take heed your self, M. R you have already made a dangerous step.2 God forbid I should be guilty of that sin, whereof you do without all conscience or reason accuse me. God is omnipotent, and ever was, and ever will be. But his omnipotency proveth not your Real presence. For have you learned to conclude, that seeing God is omnipotent, and hath power to do all things, therefore he doth all things, yea offereth violence to his own body for maintenance of your absurd & heretical assertions? must Gods omnipotency attend upon your fancies? Cannot god be omnipotent, unless your real presence be granted? No such matter, thanks be to God: & so your accusation of infidelity is vain and childish. Albeit I suppose you are not ignorant altogether of your own scholastical doctrine concerning Gods omnipotency. ⟨p. 179⟩Your schoolmen teach that God cannot do any thing wherein a contradiction is implied: 3& that all other things he can do, and therefore is omnipotent. 4But herein a manifest contradiction is implied, that Christs body should be visible and invisible together, that it is compassed and circumscribed in one certain place, and that also it is contained in an infinite number of sacraments, without any circumscription of place. And thus your own schoolmen teaching, and that truly, that god cannot do any thing, wherein is included a contradiction, because he cannot lie, have in deed ground to powder your conceit of Real presence, which without most clear contradiction can never be maintained. For if Christs body be visible, how is it then invisible? If Christs body have all properties of a natural body, whereof this is one, & that most necessary & inseparable, to be contained and circumscribed in one certain place: how can it then be true that his body is in infinite places without any circumscription at all?
Being come to the matter in hand,1 you shewe your selfe more hotte and hastie in words, then discrete or pithie in your arguments. For that I said it is a contradiction, ⟨p. 178⟩to maintaine that one and the same bodie should together both be visible & inuisible, circumscriptible and incircumscriptible, as you do moste fondlie imagine and teach of Christs body, you charge me with infidelitie for denying gods omnipotency, which euerie Christian professeth in the first article of the Creede. Of Atheisme and infidelitie take heede your selfe, M. R you haue alreadie made a dangerous step.2 God forbid I should be guiltie of that sin, wherof you do without all conscience or reason accuse me. God is omnipotent, and euer was, and euer wilbe. But his omnipotency prooueth not your Reall presence. For haue you learned to conclude, that seing God is omnipotent, and hath power to doe all things, therefore he doth al things, yea offereth violence to his owne body for maintenance of your absurd & hereticall assertions? must Gods omnipotency attend vpon your fansies? Cannot god be omnipotent, vnles your real presence be graunted? No such matter, thankes be to God: & so your accusation of infidelitie is vaine and childish. Albeit I suppose you are not ignorant altogether of your owne scholastical doctrine concerning Gods omnipotency. ⟨p. 179⟩Your schoolemen teach that God cannot do any thing wherein a contradiction is implied: 3& that all other things he can doe, and therefore is omnipotent. 4But herein a manifest contradiction is implied, that Christs body should be visible and inuisible togeather, that it is compassed and circumscribed in one certaine place, and that also it is contained in an infinite number of sacraments, without any circumscription of place. And thus your owne schoolemen teaching, and that trulie, that god cannot doe any thing, wherein is included a contradiction, because he cannot lie, haue in deede grounde to powder your conceit of Real presence, which without moste cleare contradiction can neuer be maintained. For if Christs body be visible, how is it then inuisible? If Christs body haue all properties of a natural body, whereof this is one, & that moste necessary & inseperable, to be contained and circumscribed in one certaine place: how can it then be true that his body is in infinite places without any circumscription at all?
- 1pag. 183.
- 2The papists to prove their Real presence are faine to flee to Gods omnipotency, and thus to argue: god is able to make his body Really present in the sacrament, therefore so he doth.The papists to prooue their Reall presence are faine to flee to Gods omnipotencie, and thus to argue: god is able to make his body Reallie present in the sacrament, therefore so he doth.
- 3Thom. 1. p. 25. q. 3. art.
- 4The popish schoolmen confute the popish fantasy of Real presence.The popish schoolemen confute the popish fantasie of Reall presence.