the same booke, I say, both for matter and substance, hath of late yeeres been printed at Paris, at Collen, at Venice;* whereby not onely the Doctrine of merits is eclipsed, but now the Romane faith is discovered to differ from the ancient. What meanes therefore may wee imagine can bee found, how these men should rectifie their own printed Authors? Behold, the Romane Inquisitors have carefully provided by two Expurgatory Indices, that the words of comfort which the Priest was injoyned to pronounce to the sicke person, should be blotted out.

And as the Doctrine of Justification was rightly preached in those dayes (according to the now Protestant Faith, and contrary to the Tenet of the now Romane Church), so likewise you shall observe, that the two Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lord's Supper, were publikely taught, and duely administered in the same faith and doctrine before the Conquest, as they are now declared and received in the Church of England.

PARAG. 2.

The Sacrament of Baptisme and the Lord's Supper. FIRST, concerning the Sacrament of Baptisme, I thinke there is none so blind or stupid, that will

Ordo Baptizandi, cum modo visitandi infirmos, Paris, 1575. Colon. anno 1556. Ven. anno 1575.

+ Quirog. pa. 149. Sandou. et Roxas; anno 1612.

denie the Baptisme now used in our Church, both for matter and forme, to bee substantially the same that the Primitive Church ever used, and that the Romish additions of Salt and Spittle, and other Ceremonies used by them, neither cause a transubstantiation in the element, nor the want of them inforceth rebaptization in the Protestant. So that concerning the truth of our Baptisme there can be no question. And as concerning the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, in the dayes of Elfricke, about the yeere (996) there was a Homily appointed publikely to bee read to the people on Easter day, before they did receive the Communion, wherein the same faith and doctrine (which our Church now professeth) was publiquely taught and received, and the Doctrine of the reall presence, (which at that time had got some footing in the Church) was plainly confuted and rejected. Neither was this the particular doctrine of one Bishop, but at the same time, the same matter was delivered to the Clergy by divers Bishops at their Synods out of two others Writings, or Epistles, published by the same Elfricke, one whereof was directed to Wulfstius then Bishop of Sherbourne; the other written to Wulfstane, Archbishop of Yorke, wherein both Priests and people, by their command and directions, were instructed and taught the doctrine of the Eucharist in these words; There is a great difference betwixt the body wherein Christ suffered, and the body

* The Sacrament of the Eucharist.

which is received of the faithfull. The body truly that Christ suffered in, it was borne of the flesh of Marie, with blood and with bone, with skinne and with sinewes, in humane limbes, with a reasonable soule living: and his spirituall body, which nourisheth the faithfull spiritually, is gathered of many Cornes without blood and bone, without limbe, without soule; and therefore there is nothing to be understood bodily, but spiritually, &c.* This I say, and the like doctrine was approoved by the Abbot of Malmsbury, by the Archbishop of Yorke, by the Bishop of Sherbourne, by divers Bishops at their Synods, and by them commended to the rest of the Clergie †, who were commanded to reade it publikely to the common people upon Easter day, for their better preparation and instruction in the Sacrament. And for the same cause by the motion of Wulfstan the Archbishop, was Elfricke induced to translate the foresaid writings out of Latine into the vulgar tongue, being of like argument with the Homily before mentioned. If this Protestant faith then publiquely professed, had been taught onely by a multitude of seditious and factious persons, or had been received by some few excommunicate mem

*

&c.

Elfrick's Homily. B. Usher in his answer to a challenge, cap. Real. Præs. p. 78, 79.

Elfricus Abbas Vulstano Archiepisc. salutem in Christo. Ecce parvimus vestræ almitatis jussionibus, transferentes Anglicè duas Epistolas quas Latino eloquiodescriptas ante annum vobis destinavimus. Transcript. ex lib. MS. in Bibl. publ. James in his detection of the corruption of the FF. par. 2. p. 55. bers

E

bers in the same Church; our adversaries might have some colour, some plea, to denie the visibility of our Church. But when it appeares that it was generally published by the chiefe Bishops and Pastors of several congregations; when it appeares these Doctors had their calling and succession in the Romane Church; when it appeares it was approved by a publike Synod at their meetings; I cannot but account it a Jesuite's vaine flourish to tell us, That wee cannot espie out so much as one Towne, one Village, one House, for (1500) yeeres that savoured of our Doctrine*. So that if in that time any faction, or opposition arose concerning this doc. trine, it was occasioned, not by bringing in a new doctrine, but by maintaining the old, and that with consent and approbation of the Bishops then living. Nay more, if that the faith of Gregory the Great, published here in England (400) yeeres before that time; If, I say, his faith and doctrine continued the same here in our Island, without alteration, till the coming of Luther, (which our adversaries confidently maintaine,) eyther this Homily published by the Bishops, was the faith of Gregory, and so our Church continued visible in the same faith from his time till ours, or else the Roman doctrine now taught and beleeved, hath not continued the same without alteration untill the dayes of Luther.

Thus the Word and Sacraments taught by Christ and his Apostles, were published and proclaimed

* Camp. Rat. 3 Whit. p. 14.

by

by the Bishops, and Archbishops of those times, for the saving knowledge, and knowne salvation both of Priests and people. So that the most substantiall points of our religion were visibly knowne, and generally published, not in private corners, but in publike libraries; not in obscure assemblies, but in open Churches, and generall congregations of our own countrey, in the darkest ages long before Luther's dayes.

And although the Inquisitors have not as yet passed their sentence upon Elfrick's Homily,* yet in that Homily they have suggested Transubstantiation by two feigned miracles, contrary to the doctrine of the Eucharist then publikely taught, and farre different from the whole scope of the author. And the Latine Epistle written by Elfricke to the Archbishop of Yorke, is to bee seene mangled and razed in a Manuscript in Bennet's Colledge in Cambridge, (as it is well observed by a learned Divine†) and I cannot conceive, but it was done by some Romanist, because it doth plainely confute the Doctrine of Transubstantiation. Thus we see, what time and errour hath brought to passe. That Protestant Faith, which in Elfrick's dayes, was generally received in England for Catholike Doctrine touching the Sacrament, is now condemned as hereticall by a prevailing faction in the

Elfrick's Sermon on Easter-day; printed at London 1623, page 7.

†D. James, in his detection of corruption of Fathers, par. 2, p. 55.