Acts and Monuments Volume 2 Part 1

2. An other evidence touching the same, of lands in the County of Leicester.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod Ego Radulphus filius & haeres Ioannis Wiscarde de Sceyle dedi, & concessi, & hac mea •• esenti carta cōfirmaui Agneti de Welintona vnam a cram terrae in territorio de maiori Sceylae quae iacet super le Wouelondis, inter terram monachorum de Miriuall, extendentem se ad vnum caput super soreram monachorum de Miriuall, & aliud caput versus villam de Sceyle: Habendum & tenendum de me & haeredibus meis vel assignatis & eorum haeredibus praedict. Agneti de Welintona & pueris suis de Will. Persona de Lollinton procreatis, videlicet Willielmo filio suo primogenito, si superuixerit matri suae. Deinde Galfrido fratri eius. Postea Roberto fratri eorum iuniori. Deinde sororibus eorum si frater superstes non fuerit. Ita quidem quod quilibet eorum alteri succedat in dictam terram cum pertinentijs licentialiter sine omni recognitione mihi & omnibus meis praedictis facienda: & quod haeredibus vel assignatis vltimi vel vltimae possidētis remaneat vlterius in perpetuum libere, & quiet, been & in pace iure perpetuo: Reddēdo inde annuatim mihi & haeredibus meis vel assignatis meis & eorum haeredibus vnum obolum argenti ad pascha, pro omnibus seruitijs, & exactionibus, wardis, ma • itagijs, releuijs, legatis, tallagijs, & omnimodis sectis comitatus, hundredorū & curiae meae & haeredum meorum, & aliorum, & seruitijs forinsecis vel exigētijs humanis. Ego vero Radulphus & haeredes mei vel assignati & eorum haeredes, totam praedictam terram cum pertinentijs, • raedict. Agneti & filijs suis & filiabus post decessum praedict. Agnetis, singulis eorum de dicta persona genitis vni post alterū successive, & haeredibus vel assignatis vltimi vel vltimae possidentis (vt praedictum est) contra omnes mortals in perpetuum warrantizabimus, acquietabimus, & defendemus. Et vt haec omnia supradicta rata & inconcussa permaneant in posterum, praesentem cartam sigilli mei impressione corroboraui: His testibus, Willielmo tunc Persona de Stretton, Petro de Vorantisthorpe, Richardo & Roberto filijs suis Henrico filio Richardi Clerici de Sceyle, Willielmo filio suo, Ioanne filio Radu • phi Aky, Williel, Clerico de eadem, & multis alijs.

3. An other evidence of like effect.

SCiant praesentes & futuri. quod ego Radulphus Wilscharde, filius & haeres Ioannis Wilscardi de Sceyle, dedi & concessi, & hac mea praesenti carta confirmaui Agneti de Willington, quatuor acras & vnam rodam terrae meae arabilis in campo de maiori Sceyle. Quarum vna acra iacet super Wodde Hulles, &c. [Et Paulo infra:] Habend & tenend. de me & haeredibus meis vel assignatis & eorum haeredibus, praedict. Agnetae de Willington & pueris suis de Willielmo persona de Lollinton procreatis, videlicet Willielmo filio suo primogenito si superuixerit matri suae, deinde Galfrido fratri eius, postea Roberto fratri eorum iuniori, deinde sororibus eorum si frater superstes non fuerit, ita quidem quod quilibet eorum alteri succedat in dictam terram cum pertinentijs, licentialiter sine omni recognitione mihi & omnibus meis praedictis facienda, & quod haeredibus vel assignatis vltimi vel vltimae possidentis remaneat vlterius in perpetuum libere, & quiet, been, & in pace iure perpetuo: Reddendo inde annuatim mihi & haeredibus vel assignatis & eorum haeredibus, vnum obolum argenti ad pascha, aut vnum par albarum chirothecarum de praecio vnius obuli apud Sceyle ad voluntatem soluētis, pro omnibus se • uitijs & exactionibus, wardis, maritagijs, releuijs, legatis, talliagijs & omnimodis sectis comitatus hundredorum & curiae meae & haeredum meorum & aliorum, & seruitijs forinsecis vel exigentijs humanis. Ego vero Radulphus & haeredes mei ve • assignati & eorum haeredes, totam praedictam terram cum pertinētijs, praedict. Agneti & filijs eius & filiabus post discessum praedict. Agnetis▪ singulis eorum de dicta persona genitis vni post a • terū successive, & haeredibus vel assignatis vltimi vel vltime possidentis (vt praedictum est) contra omnes mortals in perpetuum warrantizabimus, acquietabimus, & defendemus. Et vt haec omnia supradicta, rata & inconcussa permaneant in posterum, praesentem cartam sigilli mei impressione corrobora • : His testibus, Will. tunc Persona de Stretton, Petro de Vorantisthorpe, Rich & Rob▪ filijs suis. Henr. filio Personae de Sceyle, Ioāne filio, Radulph. Aky, de eadem, Rob. Hastyng, Williel. Grym, & alijs.

4. An other evidence upon the like matter.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod ego Henricus filius Domini Willielmi de Apleby militis, dedi, concessi, & hac praesenti carta mea confirmaui Henrico de Aldolester Clerico & Amiciae vxori suae, illud mesuagium quod Matheus Gilbert quond • de me tenuit in paruo Apilby, in longitudine iuxta altam via: tenendum & habendum de me & haeredibus meis, sibi & Amiciae vxori suae & eorum haeredibus, & cui vel quibus communibus horis quandocun{que} dare vel assignare voluerint, libere, quiet, been & in pace, &c Et ego praedict. Henricus & haeredes mei praedictum mesuagium cum omnibus aisiamentis & pertinentijs suis praefatis, Henrico & Amiciae vxori suae & eorum haeredibus & assignatis (vt supra scriptum est) contra omnes gentes warrantizabimus & defendemus in perpetuum &c. Vt haec omnia subscripta robur obtineant in futuro, huic praesenti scripto sigillum meum apposui: His testibus, Ioanne de Norton, Willielmo Huelen de Apilby, &c.

5. An other evidence touching the like.

SCiant praesentes & futuri, quod ego Rogerus Pescher de Apilby dedi, concessi, & hac praesenti carta mea confirmaui Henrico de Aldolester Clerico, & Amiciae vxori suae, viginti buttes terrae arabilis cum pertinentijs suis in territorio de Apilbe. Quarū tres buttes iacent super Brodelein, &c. [Et Paulo post: Tenend. & habend. praedict. Henrico & Amiciae vxori suae & eorum haeredibus & assignatis, cui vel quibus in sanitate vel in aegritudine, dare, legare, vendere, vel assignare voluerint, libere, quiet, been & haereditarie in perpetuum, &c. Et ego praedictus Rogerus Pescher & haeredes mei totam praedictam terram cum pertinentijs suis vbicun{que} memoratis, Henrico & Amiciae vxori suae & eorum haeredibus & assignatis (vt supra scriptum est) contra omnes gentes in calumnias warrantizabimus, & in omnibus & per omnia acquietabimus & defendemus in futurum, &c. Vt haec mea donatio, concessio, & cartae meae confirmatio robur obtineat in perpetuū, huic praesenti scripto sigillum meum pro me & haeredibus meis du • i apponendum, fide mediante: His testibus, Williel. de Meycham, Ioanne filio Henrici de Norton, &c.

6. An other evidence touching the same, of lands in the County of Darb.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod ego Wilhelmus filius & haeres quondam Williel. Mahenmey de Banquel Clerici, dedi, concessi, & omnino quietum clamaui de me & haeredibus meis in perpetuum Nich de Crumford pro quadam summa pecuniae quam idem Nicholaus mihi prae manibus donauit, omnes terras & tenementa cum gardinijs, curtilagijs, burgagijs & edificijs, & cum omnibus pertinentijs suis in omnibus rebus & locis, sine aliquo retinemento, quae & quas habuit iure haereditario in feodo de Banquel. per Williel. de Banquel Clericum quondam patrem meum, Habend. & tenend. ipso Nicholao & haeredibus suis vel assignatis in feodo & haereditate de capitali Domino de Banquel, libere, been, quiet, & in pace cū omnibus libertatibus & aisiamentis in omnibus locis & singulis ad praedicta terras & tenementa pertinentibus infra villam de Banquel & terra: Ita quidem quod nec ego Williel. nec haeredes mei, nec aliquis pro me nec nomine nostro ius vel clameum in praedictis terris & tenementis, gardinijs, curtilagijs, burgagijs, edificijs, & omnibus pertinentijs suis de caetero habere, exigere, vendicare vel reclamare potero vel poterimus in perpetuum: Faciendo pro praedict terris & tenementis capitali domino 7. solidos, 3 denarios & obulū argenti annui redditus ad terminos statutos Paschatis, & S. Michaelis. In cuius rei testimonium huic scripto praesenti sigillum meum apposui & munimenta inde eidem Nicholao tradidi: His testibus, domino Ioanne de Osemondiston perpetuo vicario de Banquel, Mathaeo de Reynedon, Mathaeo Drabill, Elio de Banquell Clerico, Richardo de Yollegrane, Rogero Filio Yoke, & alijs.

7. Another Evidence concerning the like.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod ego Williel. filius & haeres quondam Willielmi Mahenmey de Banquer Clerici, dedi, concessi, & hac praesenti carta mea confirmaui de me & haeredibus meis in perpetuum, Nicholao de Crumford pro quadā summa pecuniae mihi prae manibus data, vnum capitale mesuagium edificatum, & vnam bouatam terrae, cum prato & omnibus pertinent. suis sine aliquo retinemento, illam videlicet bouaram terrae cum pertinentijs quam Wilhelmus Mahenmey quondam pater meus habuit & tenuit in villa & territorio de Banquell: & octo acras terrae arabilis, & vnam particulam prati diuisim iacientes in campis de Banquell. &c. Habend & tenend. ipso Nicholao & haeredibus suis vel suis assignatis in feodo & haereditate, libere, quiet, been, & in pace, cum omnibus libertatibus, & aisiamentis in omnibus rebus & locis infra villā de Bāquel & extra, ad praed. terras & tenementa cum pertinentijs pertinētibus de capitali domino de Banquel. &c. Et ego Williel. & haeredes mei omnia praedicta terras & tenementa cum omnibus pertinent. suis vt (praedictum est) dicto Nicholao & haeredibus suis vel suis assignatis contra omnes gentes warrantizabimus. In cuius rei testimonium praesenti scripto sigillum meum apposui: His testib{us}, Domino Ioanne de Osemondist • n perpetuo Vicario de Banquel, Math. de Reynedon▪ Math. Drabill, Elio de Banquel, Rich. de Yollegraue▪ Rogero 〈◊〉 Yoke de Banquel, & alijs.

8. An other evidence concerning the like.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod nos Thomas de Billeston Clericus & Leticia vxor mea, dedimus, concessimus, & hac praesenti carta nostra confirmauimus Gerardo Filio Alexādri de Wiston & Cicilie vxori suae, omnia illa burgagia, mesuagia: gardina, curtilagia, terras, tenementa, parta & edificia, seldas cum redditibus, seruitijs, pascuis, communis, pasturis & caeteris omnib. pertinentijs suis in feodo de Banquel, quae habuimus ex dono & feofamento dicti Gerardi: Habendum & tenendum dictis Gerardo & Ciciliae vxorisuae ad totam vitam eorundem de nobis & haeredibus nostris, libere, quiet, been, & in pace, cum omnibus suis pertinentijs: faciendo inde annuatim nobis & haeredibus nostris, praedict Gerardus & Caecilia ad totam eorum vitam, vnum denarium argenti ad festum S. Michaelis, & faciendo etiam pro nobis & haeredibus nostris capitali Domino feodi illius seruitia, inde annuatim d • bita & consueta. Et nos vero praedicti Thomas & Letitia & nostri haeredes omnia praedicta burgagia, mesuagia, gardina curtilagia, terras, tenementa, prata & edificia; seldas cum redditibus, seruitijs, pascuis, communis pasturis, & caeteris omnibus pertinentijs suis praedictis Gerardo & Caeciliae ad totam vitam eorundem contra omnes gen • es warrantizabimus. In cuius rei testimoniū huic praesenti cartae nostrae sigilla nostra apposuimus: His testibus, Thoma de Beley, Radulpho Co •• errel. Will de Crūford▪ Williel. de Gratton, Nic. de Crumford in Banquel, Rad. Bercar • o in eadem, Rob. de Walley in eadem, & alijs.

9. An other evidence touching the same.

VNiuersis ad quos praesens scriptum peruenerit, Leticia quae fuit vxor Thomae de Bylleston, salutem in domino. Noueritis me in pura viduitate mea concessisse & confirmasse pro me & haeredibus meis Gerardo filio Alexandri de Wyston, & Caecillae vxori suae omnes terras & tenementa cum omnibus pertinentijs suis in Banquell, quae idem Gerardus & Cicilia vxor eius habent ex concessione Thomae de Bylleston quondam viri mei: Habendū & tenendum eisdem Gerardo & Ciciliae ad totam vitam eorundem de me & haeredibus meis libere, quiet, cum omnibus pertinentijs suis: faciendo inde mihi & haeredibus meis vnum denariū argenti ad festum S. Michaelis, & faciendo inde pro me & haeredibus meis capitalibus Dominis seruitia inde annuatim debita & consueta. Et ego praefata Leticia & haeredes meis praedicta tenementa cum pertinent. praedictis Gerardo & Ciciliae ad totam vitam eorundem contra omnes gentes warrantizabimus. In cuius rei testimonium praesentibus sigillum meum apposui: His testibus Rob▪ le Walley, Rob. le Taylor, & alijs. Datum apud Banquell, die veneris proximo post festum Annunciationis beatae Mariae, anno regni Regis Edwardi filij Regis Edwardi nono.

10. An other evidence touching the like matter.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod ego Williel. dictus Basket, dedi, concessi, & hac praesenti mea carta confirmaui Ioanni de Bradburne Clerico & Aliciae vxori suae, & haeredibus de corporibus eorum exeūtibus, vnam particulam curtilagij mei (videlicet) centum pedes in longitudine, & triginta in latitudine, cum omnibus pertinentis & aisiamentis, eidem placeae pertinēt • bus: Habendum & tenendum eidem Ioanni & Aliciae & eorum haeredibus legitime procreatis, libere, quiet, been, & in pace in perpetuum, reddendo inde annuatim mihi & haeredibus meis vnum florem Rosae ad festum Natiuit. S. Ioannis Baptistae pro omnibus. Et ego praedictus Williel Basket & haeredes mei praedictam placeam cum aisiamentis contra omnes gentes warrantizabimus & contra omnes gentes defendemus. Et si contingat (quod absit) quod praedictus Ioannis & Alicia sine haeredibus de corporibus eorum legitime procreatis obierint, quod praedicta placea sine alicuius cōtradictione reuertatur. Et vt haec mea donatio, cōcessio, & praesentis cartae meae confirmatio • ata sit & stabilis permaneat, huic praesenti cartae sigillum meum apposui: His testibus, Richardo de Longdun, Rob. Brag. Rog. Gerard, Thoma le Plumer, Ioanne Glākirion & alijs. Datum apud Yelgraue in festo S▪ Ioannis ante portam Latinam. Anno Domini 1313.

11. An other evidence touching the same.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod ego Rogerus le Potter haeres Aliciae filiae Williel. de Downedale de parua Ridware dedi, cōcessi, & haec praesenti cartame • confirmaui magistro Richardo de Hampton Clerico & Margaretae vxori eius, & haeredibus vel assignatis praedicti Rich. omnes terras & tenementa mea quae habeo in diuersis locis in feodo de parua Ridware: Habend. & tenend. omnes praedictas terras & tenementa cum pertinentijs eorū praedictis Rich. & Margaretae vxori eius & haeredibus vel assignatis predicti Rich. de capitali Domino feodi illius per seruitia debita & de iure consueta, libere, quiet, been, & in pace in perpetuum. Et ego vero praedictus Rogerus & haeredes mei omnes praedictas terras & tenementa cum omnibus partinentijs eorum, praedictis Rich. & Margaretae vxori eius & haeredibus vel assignatis praedicti Rich. contra omnes gentes warrantizabimus & defendemus in perpetuum. In cuius rei testimonium huic praesenti cartae sigillum meum apposui: His testibus, Thoma de Pipe▪ Rich. Julian, Roberto Ka, Edmund le Walshemon, Williel. le Flecher, & alijs. Datum apud paruam Ridware die Lunae proximo post festum S. Gregorij Papae, Anno regni Regis Edwardi 3 post Conquestum 28.

The originals of these 11. pieces of evidences last recited I received, in the writing of this story, of a right honest and worshipful Gentleman called M. John Forde, a student of the laws in the Inner Temple: in whose hands (I trust after the finishing of this story) shall remain to be seen of them that shall desire the same.

1. The copies of other Evidences touching the same matter, received of Master John Hunt.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod ego Phillippus Poupu de parua Bradley, dedi, concessi, & hac praesenti carta mea cōfirmaui Henrico de Denardistone Clerico & Aliciae vxori eius, pro seruitijs eorum & pro quadam summa pecuniae quam mihi dederunt prae manibus in gersumam, vnam peciam terrae meae arabilis cum omnibus pertinentijs, sieve habeatur plus sieve minus, prout bundae testantur, in campo vocato Grenecrost, in villa de parua Bradley, iacentem inter terram meam ex parte vna, & terram praedicti Henrici ex parte altera, vno capite abuttante super Coemeterium de parua Bradley, & alio capite abuttante super terram praedicti Henrici: Habend. & tenend. de capitalibus Dominis feodi praedict. Henrico & Aliciae vxori eius, ha • red. & assignat. dict. Henrici, vel cuicun{que} vel quibuscun{que} dict. peciam terrae cam omnibus pertinent: dare, vendere, legare vel assignare voluerint, libere, quiet, iure been, in pace in perpetuum & hereditary: Reddendo inde annuatim capitalibus Dominis feodi feruitium inde debitum & consuetum, videlicet vnum obulum ad Natiuitatem beati Ioannis Baptistae pro omnibus seruirijs, consuetudinibus, auxilijs, curiarum sectis, & secularibus demand. Et ego praedict. Phil. hered. & a • signat, mei warrantizabimus praedictam peciam terrae cum omnibus pertinent, praedictis Henrico & Aliciae vxori eius, heredibus & assignat. dict. Henrici, contra omnes gentes in perpetuum. In cuius rei testimonium, huic praesenti scripto sigillum meum apposui: His testibus, Petro de Walpol. Rich. de Hanuile. Williel. Wastell, Hugone Wastell, Thoma de Bures, Williel. Picot, Laurentio Picot, Williel. le Heyward, & alijs.

2. An other evidence touching the same.

OMnibus Christi fidelib{us} ad quos praesens scriptum peruenerit, Williel. le Bygod, salutem in Domino sempiternam. Nouerit vniuersitas vestra me dedisse, cōcessisse, remisisse, ac omnino tam pro me quam pro haeredibus meis in perpetuum, quietū clamasse Hērico de Denardiston Clerico & Aliciae vxori eius, hered. & assignat. eorum totum ius & clameum quod habui vel habere potui aut potero in omnibus redditibus, homagijs, wardis, releuijs, eschaetis, libertatibus & omnibus pertinent. suis, quae in aliquo modo seu tempore facere debuerunt vel consueuerunt pro terris & tenement. quae quondam fuerunt Rich. Poup, in villa de parua Bradley, & in alijs terris & tenement, quae vel quas praedict. Henr. & Alicia tenent vel tenuerunt de me seu de feodo meo die confection is praesentium in praedicta villa de parua Bradley: Ita quod ego Williel praedict. nec haered mei nec aliquis nomine nostro amodo in praemissis aliquid iuris vel clamei aliquo modo exigere vel vendicare poterimus in perpetuum. In cuius rei testimonium, huic praesenti scripto sigillum meum apposui: Histestibus, Ioanne Maueysin, Rich Bercar. Henr. Maueysin, John. Bercar, Williel: Wastel, Hug. Wastel. Will. Attegrene, Walt. Bercar, & alijs.

3. An other evidence touching the like matter.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod ego Reginaldus filius Iordani de Wethresfeld, dedi, concessi, & hac praesenti carta mea cōfirmaui Hē. de Denardistō Clerico & Aliciae vxori eius pro homagis & seruitijs eorum, & pro quadam summa pecuniae quam mihi dederunt praemanibus in gersumam, vnam peciam terrae meae arabilis cum omnibus suis pertinentijs, sieve habeatur plus sieve minus, in villa de parua Bradley, in campo vocato heldhey, iacētem inter terram Williel. de Mampford quondam, & terram Ioannis le Rede quondam, ex parte vna in longitudine, & tertam Richar. de Hanuyle ex altera, & abuttat ad vnum caput super terrā Ioannis le Lombard, & aliud caput super canpum vocatum Crōdon, cum sepibus & foueis & omnibus alijs pertinentijs, ad dictā terram spectantibus: Habend. & tenend. de me haeredibus & assignatis meis, praedictis Henrico & Aliciae vxori eius, heredibus & assignatis dict. Henrici, vel cuicunque vel quibuscunque dict, Henr. praedictam terram cum omnibus pertinentijs praedict. dare vendere vel aliquo modo assignare voluerit, libere, quiet, iure, been, in pace & hereditary: Reddendo inde annuatim mihi haeredibus, & assignat. meis, vnàm rosam ad festum natiuitatis Sancti Ioannis Baptistae pro omnibus seruiti; s, consuetudinibus, auxilijs, curiarum sectis & secularibus demaundis. Et ego praedict. Reginaldus, heredes, & assignati mei warrantizabimus, acquietabimus & defendemus praedictam terram cum sepibus & foueis & omnibus alijs pertinentijs praedictis Henrico & Aliciae vxori eius, heredibus, & assignat. dict. Henrici per praedict. seruitium contra omnes mortals in perpetuum. In cuius rei testimonium, huic praesenti scripto sigillum meum apposui: His testibus, Ioanne Maueysin, Petro de Walepol. Ricard. de Hanuyle, Ricard. Bercar, Hen. Maueysin, Ioanne Bercar, Williel. Wastel, Hugone Wastel, Thom. de Bures, Williel. filio Rogeri, & alijs,

4. An other evidence of like effect.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod ego Richard. de Hanuyle de parua Bradley, dedi, concessi, & hac praesenti carta mea confirmaui Henr. de Denardēston Clerico & Aliciae vxori eins, vnam peciam terrae meae arabilis, cū omnibus pertinent, in parua Bradley in campo vocato Mortecrost, pro homagijs & seruitijs • orū, & pro quadam summa pecuniae quam mihi dederunt prae manibus in gersumam, iacentem inter terras Williel. de Mampford quondam ex vtra{que} parte, & vnum caput abuttat super campum vocat. Wodcraft. Habend. & tenend. de me, haered. vel assignatis meis, ipsis, haered. & assignat eorum, vel cuicun{que} vel quibuscū{que} dict. tenementum cum omnibus pertinētijs, dare, vēdere, legare, vel assignare voluerint, libere, quiet, iure been, in pace & haereditarie: Reddendo inde annuatim mihi & haeredibus meis duos denarios ad duos anni terminos, videlicet ad festum Sancti Michaelis vnum denarium, & ad Pascha vnum denarium pro omnibus seruitijs consuetudinibus, auxilijs, Curiae sectis & secularibus demaundis. Et ego praedict. Ricar. haered. & assignati mei warrantizabimus, acquietabimus, & defendemus praedict. tenementum cum omnibus pertinentijs praedictis, Henrico & Aliciae vxori eius, haered. & assignat. eorum per praedictum seruitium contra omnes mortals in perpetuum. In cuius rei testimonium huic praesenti scripto sigillū meū apposui: His testibus, Petro de Walepol, Williel. Wastel, Hugone Wastel, Ric. Bercar, Henr. Maueysin, Ioanne Bercar, Rob. de Ponte, Williel. Picot, & alijs.

5. An other evidence touching the same.

SCiant praesentes & futuri, quod ego Mathaeus de Raclisde dedi, concessi, & hac praesenti carta mea confirmaui Henrico de Denardiston Clerico & Amiciae vxori eius, haered. & assignat. dict▪ Henrici, vnam peciam terrae arabilis cum omnibus suis pertinent sieve habeatur plus sieve minus, prout iacet in villa de parua Bradley in campo vocato Cronudonbrede inter terram Ricard. de Hanuyle ex vna parte, & terram dict. Henrici de Denardiston ex alia parte, & vnam caput abuttat super viam vocatam Lebreddich, & aliud caput super terram Ricar. de Hanuyle antedict. Habend. & tenend. praedictam peciam terrae cum omnibus suis pertinent. de capitali Domino feodi, & cuicunque vel quibuscunque praedictus Henr. praedictam peciam terrae cum omnibus pertanent▪ dare, vendere, vel assignare voluerit, libere, quiet, iure, been, in pace, haereditarie in perpetuū: faciendo capitali Domino •• odi seruitia inde de iure debita & consueta. Et ego praedict. Mathaeus & heredes mei praedictam peciam terrae cum omnibus suis pertinent (vt praedictum est) praedict. Henr. & Aliciae, hered. & assignat dict Henr. contra omnes gentes warrantizabimus in perpetuum▪ In cuius rei testimonium huic praesenti cartae sygillum meum apposui: His testibus, Ricard. de Hanuyle, Ioanne de Stonham, Ioanne Godfrey Williel▪ Wastel. Clement. de Bures, & alijs. Datum apud paruam Bradley, die Lunae in quindena Sancti Michaelis. Anno Regni Regis Edwardi filij Regis Edwardi, octauo.

6. An other evidence touching the same.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod ego Richardus de Louerhal de parua Bradley, dedi, concessi, & hac praesenti carta mea confirmaui Henr. de Denardiston Clerico & Amiciae vxori eius, & haered. dict. Henr. vnam peciam terrae meae arabilis, sieve habentur plus sieve minus, prout iacet in villa de parua Bradley in campo vocato Peterfeld, inter terram Henrici Cosin ex vna parte, & terram Thom. Bercar ex alia parte, vno capite abbuttante super crostam Williel. Attegaene, & alio capite super le Ouerhallmede: Habend & tenend dictam peciam terrae cum omnibus pertinent. de capitali Domino feodi, praedict. Henr. & Aliciae & hered. dict. Henr. cuicunque & quibuscunque dictam peciam terrae dare, vēdere, vel assignare voluerint, libere, quiet iure, been, in pace, hereditary, in feodo & in perpetuum: faciēdo eidem capitali Domino feodi seruitia inde de iure debita. Et consueta Et ego praedict. Ricar. & hered. mei praed. peciam terrae praed. Henr. & Aliciae & hered. dict. Henr. & suis assignat. contra omnes gentes warrantizabimus in perpetuum. In cuius rei testimonium huic praesenti cartae sigillum meum apposui: His testibus, Ricar. de Hanuyle, Ioanne Godfrey, Ioanne de Stonham, Williel • Attegrene▪ Roberto Petipas, Williel. Aleyne, & alijs. Datum apud paruam Bradley die dominica proxima post festum Paschale. Anno Regni Regis Edwardi filij Regis Edwardi. 10.

7. An other evidence touching the like matter.

SCiant praesentes & futuri quod Ego Clemens de Cloptone, concessi, dedi, & hac praesenti carta mea confirmaui Ioanne de Bosco de Coulynge Clerico & Basiliae vxori eius & haeredibus praed Ioannis▪ tres acras terrae cum omnibus suis pertinentijs in Coulynge, sieve sit ibi maius sieve minus prout simul iacent inter terram domini Roberti de Aspal ex parte vna, & terram quódam Ioannis le Pogeys ex alia, vno capite abuttante super viam communem, & alio super terram quondam praedict. Ioannis Pogeys: Habend. & tenend. praedict. tres acras terrae cum omnibus • uis pertinent. praedict. Ioanni & Basiliae & hered praedict. Ioannis de capitalibus Domini feodi illius per seruitia inde debita & de iure consueta. Et ego praedictus Clemens & heredes mei, praedictis Ioanni & Basiliae & haered. praedict. Ioannis totam praedictam terram cum omnibus suis pertinentijs contra omnes gentes in perpetuum warrantizabimus. In cuius rei testimonium, huic praesenti chartae sigillum meum apposui: His testibus, Thoma de Caldebeke, Ricard. Farewell, Ioanne de Schelford, Roberto Godfrey, Rogero le Porter, & Williel. le Paumer. Datum apud Coulynge die dominica proxima post festum Sancti Lucae Euangelistae. Anno Regni Regis. Edwardi filij Regi, Edwardi, tertiodecimo.

All the Originals of these seven several pieces of Evidences, y ^e true copyes whereof are here before inserted and last recited, at this present ( videlicet ) this 23. of Nouēber in the year of our Lord. 1575. are in the custody and do remain among the Euedences, and writings of John Hunt of Esse alias Ashen, in the County or Essex Esquire, and are pertaining, and belonging to his Manor of Ouerhall, alias Parua Breadley aforesaid, in the County of Suffolk. At whose hands they are easily at this present and long time (I trust) after the writing of this history, shall remain to be seen, of good record, if any man either be desirous of y ^e sight thereof, or doubtful of the truth of the same.

Although these Instrumentes and Evidences above here specified, be of themselves evident & plain enough, so that no man can reasonable object anything to the contrary: yet to stop the mouths of all such wranglers and cauillers, who being satisfied with no truth, will here peradventure take some occasion upon this word Clericus, so oftentimes named in these Evidences aforesaid, to object y ^t this word may as well be taken for other, as for Priests therefore, to prevent the cavilling objections of such, this shall be briefly to reply thereunto, that in the common laws of this realm, in all gifts or feoffmentes made to any spiritual person (unless he be some graduate of Divinity in y ^e schools) the said spiritual person is named by no other term, but by y ^e word Clericus : as by diverse places, as well in the printed books, as in old Registers and writings of the Lawyers, as well in the common law, as Statute law remaineth of Recorde very evident to be seen. Some special notes whereof as well for the ease of the Reader in the search of the same, as also for the further satisfying of some who peradventure shall want the books, I thought good here to exhibit in form and tenor as followeth.

Argument,

Da- In the Sacrament of the Lord's body, the thing that representeth must needs bear a similitude of the thing represented.

ti- The substance of bread in the Sacrament, is only that which beareth the similitude of Christ's body.

j. Ergo, the substance of bread, must needs be in the Sacrament.

And therefore by this demonstratiō, it is apparent, that these ii. partes in the Article aforesaid, are evil couched together, whereof the one must needs destroy the other. For if the first part of the Article be true, that the natural body of Christ is present in the Sacrament, under the forms of bread and wine, and seeing the Sacrament wherein the body of Christ is present, must needs be the substance of bread and not the accidences only of bread, as is above proved, then the substance of bread cannot be euacuated from the Sacrament, and so the second member of the Article must needs be false.

Or if the second part be true that there is no substance of bread remaining, and seeing there is nothing else to make the sacrament of the natural body of Christ, but only the substance of bread, for as much as the accidences of bread can make no Sacrament of Christ's body, as is above shown: then taking away the substance of bread, the first pa • t of the article must needs be false, which saith that the natural body of Christ is present in the sacrament forasmuch as the substance of bread being euacuated, there remaineth no Sacrament, wherein the body of Christ should be present. 2. Secondly, that it disagreeth from the whole order and course of the scriptures, it is sufficiently explained before, in the treatise of John Lambert, upon the Sacrament. pag. 1099. as also in other sundry places in this volume besides. 3. Thirdly, that the said Article of transubstantiation is no ancient nor authentic doctrine in the church publicly received: but rather is a novelty lately invented, reaching not much above y ^e age of 3. or 4. hundred years or at most above the the time of Lancfrancus an, 1070. it remaineth now to be proved,

Wherein first may be joined this issue, that this monstrous paradox of transubstantiation was never induced or received publicly in the church, before the time of the Lateran Council, under Pope Innocentius the 3. ann. 1216. or at most before the time of Lanfrancus, the Italian, Archbishop of Cant. 1070.

In which time of Lanfrancus, I deny not, but that this question of transubstantiation began to come in controversy, and was reasoned upon, amongst certain learned of the clergy. But that this Article of transubstantiation was publicly determined, or prescribed in the church for a general law or Catholic doctrine of all men necessarily to be believed, before the time of the forsayd Innocentius the 3. it may be doubted, and also by histories of time proved to be false.

And though our adversaries seem to allege out of the old Doctors certain speeches and phrases, which they wrast and wring to their purposes: wherein they say: that the bread is called, is believed, & is the body of Christ that of bread is made the body of Christ: that the bread is changed, altered, or converted to the body of Christ, or is made to be his body, that the creatures be converted into the substance of the body and blood of Christ: that the bread and wine do pass into the divine substance, with such other like sentences: and bear themselves brag upon the same as thought this doctrine of transubstantiation stood upon y ^e consent of the whole universal Church, of all ages and times of nations and people, and that the judgment of the Church was never other then this: and yet if the old Doctors sayings be well weighed, and the discourse of times by this history well examined, it will be found that this prodigious opinion of transubstantiation hath no such ground of consent and antiquity as they imagine: nor yet that any heresy or treason was made of denying of transubstantiatiō before y ^e time of Innocentius the 5. or at the furthest of Lanfrancus, as is aforesaid: about the which time Satan the old Dragon was prophesied by the Apocalypse to be let lose, to seduce the world.

For probation whereof, first I will begin with the time of Tertullian, and of Augustine: which both do teach the Sacrament to be a figure, a sign, a memorial, & representation of the Lord's body, and knew no such transubstantiation: & yet were no traitors nor heretics.

Neither was S. Ambrose any heretic or traitor, where he writeth these words: Vt sint, quae erant, & in aliud conuertantur. &c. Which words Lanfrancus could not answer unto any otherwise, but by denying them to be the words of Ambrose.

Gelasius was bishop if Rome, and lived about 500. years after Christ, and speaketh of a transmutation of the bread and wine into the divine nature, but there expounding himself, he declareth what he meaneth by that mutation, so that he expressly showeth the elements of bread & wine, notwithstanding to remain still in their proper nature, with other words moe, very plain, to the same effect: unto the which words Contarenus in the assemble of Ratesbone, could not well answer, but stood astonied.

Theodoretus likewise speaking of the visible simboles, hath these words: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . i. after the sanctification they remain in their former substance, figure and form. &c.

Irenaeus, where he saith, that the bread broken and the cup mixed, after the vocation of God, cease to be common bread anymore, but are the Eucharist of the body and blood of Christ: and explicating his words more plainly addeth moreover, that the Eucharist consisteth in 2. things, one being earthly, which is bread & wine: the other heavenly: which is the body and blood of Christ. &c. declareth in these words, both his own opinion plainly, & also teacheth us what was then the doctrine of his time.

Hesichius also who was 500. years after Christ where he speaketh of the said mistery, quod simul panis & caro est. i. which he saith to be both flesh, and bread, declareth thereby two substances to be in the Sacrament. By the which we have to understand, that transubstantiation in his age was not crept into the Church: and yet neither heresy nor treason therefore was ever laid to his charge for so saying.

Emissenus, comparing a man converted to Christ, by regeneration, unto the holy misteryes converted into the body and blood of our Lord, expresseth plainly, quod in exteriori nihil additum est, & totum in interiori mutatum est. That is, that outwardly nothing is changed, and that all the change is inward. &c. wherein (no doubt) he spake plain against this Article, and yet no man in all that age did accuse him therefore either to be heretic or traitor.

Here might be added the words of Fulgentius, Hic calix est nouum Testamentum, id est. Hic calix quem vobis trado, nouum Testamentum significat. i. This cup is the New Testament: that is, this cup which I deliver unto you, signifieth the New Testament.

Bede also who lived about the year 730. writing vpō the psalm 21. hath these words: Edent paupers. &c. Pauperes id est mundi contemptores, edent quidem realiter, si ad sacramenta referantur, & saturabuntur aeternaliter, qui intelligent in pane & vino visibiliter sibi proposito, inuisibile scilicet corpus verum, & sanguinē verum domini, quae verus cibus & verus potus sunt, quo non venter distenditur, sed men's saginatur. &c. that is: Poor men, to wit, despisers of the world, shall eat in deed really, if it be referred unto the Sacraments, and shall be filled eternally, because they shall understand in bread and in wine, being visibly set before them▪ a thing invisible, to wit, the true body and true blood of the Lord, which are true meat, & true drink, wherewith not the belly is filled, but the mind is nourished.

And thus in these words of Bede likewise is to be understand, that no transubstantiation, as yet in his time was received in the Church of England.

Long it were to stand upon all particulars Briefly to conclude, the farther the church hath been from these our latter days, the purer it was in all respects, and especially touching this barbarous article of transubstantiation. We will now draw more near our own time, coming to the age of Bertrame, and of Haimo, who were about the year of our Lord 810. under Carolus Magnus.

By whose writings it is evident, that the church was infected as yet with no such phantasy of transubstantiatiō neither did any almost, dream of taking away y ^e substance of bread from the Sacrament. For although Haymo, Remigius, Rabanus, and other which lived in that age, do attribute to the Sacrament, the honorable name, and reverence (as we also do) of the Lord's body and blood: yet they exclude not from thence all substance of mele & bread & lean the bare accidences, as our new come Catholics do, as by the words of Haymo doth appear. Where he following the words of Bede, showeth also the cause, why it is so called by the name of the Lord's body. Quia (saith he) panis corpus confirmat, ideo ill corpus Christi congruenter nuncupatur: Vinum autem quia sanguinem operatur in carne, ideo ad sanguinem Christi refertur. That is: Because bread confirmeth the heart of man, therefore it is called conveniently the body of Christ, and because wine worketh blood in the flesh of man, thereof is it referred to the blood of Christ. What can be more effectually spoken to prove the substance of bread there to remain? For take away the substance of bread & wine, what is in the accidences left, that can confirm mans heart, or ingender blood in the flesh. And therefore seeing there must needs something remain, that must be referred to Christ's body & blood in that Sacrament, it either must be the substance of bread and wine, or else it can be no Sacrament. And furthermore, speaking of the visible things which are sanctified how and whereunto they be converted, he saith: that by the holy ghost they pass to a Sacrament of the Lord's body.

And likewise the same Haymo in another place, speaking of the feuites of the earth, that is, of corn and wyne, declareth, how our Savior making of them an apt mistery, cōuerteth them to a Sacrament of his body and blood. &c. Lib. 7. in Ecclesiast. cap. 8.

Bertramus likewise, as he lived in the same age, so in like sort he shown his opinion therein, to the like effect as Haymo did. For as Haymo writing in these words declareth, quia aliud est Sacramentum, aliud virtus sacramenti: sacramentum enimuero percipitur, virtute Sacramenti interior homo satiatur, that is: the sacrament is one thing, and the virtue of the sacrament is another thing: for the sacrament is received with the mouth, but with the virtue of the Sacrament, the inward man is satisfied.

So after like manner, Bertramus according to y ^e same, thus writeth: Ille panis, qui per Sacerdotis ministerium Christi corpus efficitur, aliud exterius humanis sensibus ostendit, & aliud interius fidelium mentibus clamat. &c. That is: the bread, which by the ministry of y ^e priest is made the body of christ doth import one thing outwardly to the senses of man, & another thing it speaketh to the minds of the faithful. Outwardly it is bread, the same as was before, the same form is pretended, the color appeareth, the same taste remaineth. But inwardly there is another matter fare more precious, and more excellent, because it is heavenly, which is the body of Christ, that is scene, not with the outward eyes of the flesh, but with the sight of a faithful mind. &c.

We will now proceed to the testimony of Rabanus Maurus bishop of Mainz & scholar sometime to Alcuinus in Paris, an english man: who living also in the same age with Haymo and Bertrame, (which was 800. years after Christ) giveth the like testimony of this doctrine in his book of Institutions. Where he asking the question, why the Lord would give the mysteries of his body and blood, then under such things as might be kept and reserved whole with great honor? thus he answereth again: The Lord (saith he) would rather that the Sacraments of his body and blood should be received with the mouth of the faithful, and made to be their food, that by the visible action, the invisible effect might be shown: For like as material meat outwardlye nourisheth and quickeneth the body, so also the word of God inwardly nourisheth and strengtheneth the soul. For man liveth not only by bread, but by every word proceeding from the mouth of God.

And after followeth: For this bread and drink, signifieth the eternal society of the head, and of the members together.

And again: For the Sacrament is one thing, and the virtue of the Sacrament is another thing. The Sacrament is received with the mouth, with the virtue of the Sacrament the inward man is nourished: For the Sacrament is turned to the nourishment of the body, but the virtue of the Sacrament, the dignity of eternal life is gotten.

Wherefore, like as the same is turned into us, when we eat of it: so also are we turned into the body of Christ, when we live obediently and godly. &c. Who seeth not by these words of this Byshoppe, what form of doctrine was then in the Church received concerning this article of the Sacramet, much diverse from this our gross opinion of transubstantiation.

With the said Rabanus also accordeth another of the like standing and also doctrine, called Christianus Druthmerus : who writing upon Math. The wine (saith he) doth chere and cherish the blood, and therefore not incōuenienlty the blood of christ is figured thereby: for whatsoever proceedeth frō him to us it chereth us with true gladness, & increaseth all goodness unto us.

And a • it • e before, the said Druthmarus saith: The Lord gave to his Disciples the Sacrament of his body, to the remission of sins, and keeping of charity, that they always remembering his doing, might do that in figure, which he should do for them. This is my body (saith he) that is, in Sacrament. This Druthmarus lived also in the time of Carolus Magnus, as witnesseth Abbas Spaynehemensis.

After Bertamus was Johannes Scotus, or else as some call him, Johannes Erigena, a man well accepted with Carollus Caluus, and afterward with Lodouicus Balbus, about the yere of our Lord 880. He wrote a Book De corpore & sanguine Domini, so affirming therein, & teaching, as he knew that Bertramus had taught a little before in France. This book y ^e pope caused to be condemned in Vercellensi Synodo, Of the life and conversation of this Johannes Scotus, & also of his death, read before, pag. 146.

In the yere of our Lord. 950. lived Odo Archbyshop of Canterbury, in whose time it appeareth in the catholickes own confession, that many priests then affirmeth, that the bread and wine after consecration, did remain in their former substance, and that the said mysteries were only a figure of the body and blood of Christ, as we find it witnessed by Osberne himself, who did write the lives of Odo, Dunstane. and Elphege, at the bidding of Lanfrāke Archbyshop of Canterbury, as reporteth Edmerus, Anselmus Chaplain. The words of Osberne be these: Hoc fere tempore, quidam clerici maligno error seducti, asseuerare conabantur panem & vinum, quae in altari ponuntur, post consecrationem, in priori substantia manere, & figuram tantummodo esse corporis & sāguinis Christi. &c. That is: About this time (saith Osbern, writing in the days of Lanfrak) certain of the Clergy, being seduced by wicked error, did hold and maintain, that bread and wine, which are set upon the altar, after the consecration do remain in their former substance, and are but only a figure of the body and blood of Christ. &c. And no doubt but at that time, the common opinion of most of the Clergye was so that the Sacrament was the body and blood of Christ, and that the substance of bread and wine notwithstanding were not transubstantiate, as the Romish Catholics do now teach. But this is the guise of these men that in their writings and stories, still they diminish the better number, whereby their faction may seem ever to be the bigger and therefore to extenuate the common opinion then received in the Church, he inferreth mention of certain of the Clergy. &c.

And as he faileth in the number of these Clergymen which then held against transubstantiation, so he upholdeth the same with as lying a miracle: Which miracle he feigneth to be wrought the same time, for the conversion of the said Clergy men, by the blood dropping out of the host at Mass, as Odo was breaking the host over the chalice. At the sight whereof, first Odo himself (saith he) wept for joy, seeing his petition accomplished, which he so earnestly prayed for. Secondarily, all those Clergy men (saith he) which before believed not this transubstantiation, by & by were converted, and blessed the archbishop that ever he was borne, desiring him to pray again, that the blood might return to his former shape, & straight it was done. And this was the miracle: which seemeth as true, as that which W. Malmesbury writeth of the said Odo, howe by his prayers, he caused a sword to come flying from heavē into king Aethelstanes scabbard whē he had lost his own, as he should fight against Analanus : or else as that miracle where the said Odo is said to cover and defend the church of Canterbury, that no drop of rain could touch it, so long as the roof thereof was in making. Ex W. Malmesb. Vid sup. pag. 151.

In the which so miraculous a miracle, many things are to be marveled. First I marvel, that at this great miracle of the Archb. in his Cathedral Church, amongst so many singing men, we read of no Te Deum there to be song, after the doing thereof.

Secondly I marvel, that those Priests and Clerks, which then denied transubstantiation, were suffered to be so near the Archb. at his Mass, and that they were not committed rather to ward like heretics and traitors, if this Article of transubstantiatio had ben then such a Catholic doctrine, and so publicly received in the Church as they say it was.

Thirdly I marvel, seeing the time of miracles is expired, we having the scriptures to guide us, why y ^e Archbyshop would seek to miracles and apparitions to convert men, rather then to the law and Prophets, according as we are commanded, especial having no such example of all the old Doctors, which in confutatiō of so many erroneous opinions, yet never sought to such miracles, or blind means,

Fourthly, I marvel much at the discrepance in telling this tale, between Osbern and the other which since have written Legendes of Odo. For whereas Osbern speaking of certain Priests, nameth no place, but leaveth the matter at large, and speaketh absolutely: quidam clerici : all other which have since written the Legendes of Odo, do tell this tale against certain Priests of Canterbury, adding to the words of Osberne, quidam Clerici Cantuarienses But to convict the falsehood of them all, as well Osberne as of the rest, there is a legend of the life of Odo, and of Oswald together, more ancient then this of Osberne, written (as it may seem) in the time of Aelfricus Archb. of Canterbury & Elphege then Bishop of Winchester, wherein mention is made in deed of this miracle, but after another sort, then this of Osberne, & to another purpose, then to dissuade certain priests infected with that error frō the opiniō before declared: which is only brought to show the holiness of Odo: as commonly the manner of Legendes is to do. So that in this old Legend it is thus reported, that when this miracle was done, Odo disclosed the matter not to many priests of England, that were in that error as Osborne would: sed vocat protinus fidelem seruum, qui cominus erat, & miraculum secrete demonstrate, &c. that is, but called unto him a certain faithful servant, which was near about him, and shown unto him the miracle secretly. Wher upon the Priest (saith the Legende) much rejoiced at the holiness of Odo, and desired him to make his prayer to almighty God, that the body might return again to the former shape. &ce. Out of this old lying Legend, Osberne, and other likewise that followed him, seemeth to have takē this tale: so that out of the error of one (as the manner is) springeth the error of a number mo.

But this much more I marvel, why this miracle is not stored in Henry Huntingdon, which professedly writeth of such miracles, nor in Rog. Houeden, and such other: but only in such blind Legendes, which commonly have no substance of verity, nor certeinetie of time or writer, to know when, and by whom they were written, and for the most part are stuffed with lying visions, and prodigious fables.

Finally, if this miraculous fiction of Osberne, were true y ^t for the converting of Priests of England, which would not believe transubstantiation, this blood did drop out of the host (of the which blood peradventure came the blood of Hales) and that by the sight thereof the Priests e • tsoone were all converted (as Osberne pretendeth) how then came it to pass, that after the time of Odo, in the days of Elfricus, which was after him Archb. of Canterbury, y ^e third from Dunstane, and fourth from Odo, not only the Priests of England, but also the Archbishop himself, wer not yet brought to the belief of this transubstantiatiō, but taught the very same doctrine of the sacrament thē, which we do now? as most clearly appeareth both by the Epistles and Homilies of the foresaid Archbishop Elfricus, which herunder, for the more evidence (Christ willing) we will annex.

This Elfricus, as saith Capgrave, in the life of Oswald bishop of Worcester, was first Abbot of S. Albo • es and after made archbishop of Canterbury, about the yere of our Lord 996. in the time of king Etheldred, & of Wulfsinus B. of Scyrburne, Elfricus also (as witnesseth Will. of Malmesbery, in Vita Adelmi ) was Abbot of Malmesbery. Furthermore the said Will. of Malmesbery writing of Elfricus Archbishop of Canterbury, saith that he was before bishop of Welles, and afterward archbishop of Canterbury. So that Elfricus was Archbishop of Canterbury, it is out of all ambiguity. But whether Elfricus which was Abbot (of whom we do here entreat) were the same Archbishop, or not, by this diversity of Capgrave & Malmesbery, it may be doubtful. But whether, he were or no, to this our present purpose is not greatly material, for so much as the said Elfricus, & Elfricus (although they were diverse persons yet were they both in one age, and lived in one time together.

Furthermore, the same Elfricus (of whom now we speak) of what calling soever he was, yet notwithstanding he was of such estimation and good liking in those days among the most learned, that for his learning authority, and eloquence, his writings were accepted and authorised among y ^e Canons & constitutions of y ^e Church in that time, as hereby may appear: For where as the bishops and Priests before the coming of William Conqueror had collected together a certain book of Canons and ordinances, to govern the Clergy, gathered out of general and particular councils, out of the books of Gildas, out of the poenitentiall books of Theodorus Archbyshop of Canterbury, out of the writings of Egbertus archbishop of York, out of the Epistles of Aleuinus, as also out of the writings of the old Fathers of the primitive Church. &c. among the same Canons & Constitutions be placed these two Epistles of the said Elfricus here under following, whereof the one was sent to Wulfsinus Bysh. of Scyrburne, the other to Wulfstane Archb. of York, as yet are to be seen in ii. books belonging to the Library of the Church of Worcester, the one written in the old Saxons tongue entitled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the other for the most part in Latin, with this title: Admonitio spiritualis doctrinae. Which book of Saxon Canons & Constitutions belonging sometime to Wulfstane Bishop of Worcester, was given by him as for a great jewel, to the Church o • Worcester, as by the same book appeareth.

Moreover, besides this book of Worcester above touched, there is yet extant also another like book of Canons belōgyng to the Church of Exeter, wherein the same two Epistles of Elfricus be contained in the old Saxon tongue, and also in Latin, and prescribed yearly to be read to the Clerks and Priests of that Church: Which book in like manner was given to the Church of Exeter by Leofricus the first, and most famous Bishop of that sea.

Of this Elfricus further is to be understanded, that he translated two books of 80. sermons out of Latin, into the Saxon speech, used then orderly to be read in Churches on sondayes & other festiual days of the year, as by his own words may appear in the end of one of y ^e said books of sermons, whose words be these: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; We let pass many good Gospels which he that liest, may translate. For we dare not enlarge this book much further, left it be ouergreat, and so be a cause of lothsomnes to men, through the bigness thereof. &c.

Also in another place he confesseth the same of himself: whose words in the preface before his grammar be these. Ic AElfric ƿolde þa listlan boc aƿendan to engliscum gereorde of ðam staef craefte ðe is gehaten grammatica. syððan ic tƿa bec aƿende on hund eahtatigum spellum; I Elfrike was desirous to turn into our English tongue from the art of letters, called grammar, this little book, after that I had translated the two books of fourscore sermons, &c.

Of his Epistles especially we read of four, which he wrote. One to the monks of Egnesham. De consuetudine monachorum. An other to Wulfstane Arch. of York, wherein is touched the matter of the Sacrament. The third, he wrote against priests marriage, to one Sygeferth, with whom there was a certain Anker abiding, which defended the marriage of priests, affirming it to be lawful. The fourth, he wrote to Wulfsinus B. of Scyrburne, touching the matter of the sacrament. In the which epistle he taking occasion by a certain abuse in his time, which was, that priests on Easter day filled their housel box, and so kept it for the space of the whole year, till Easter came again, for sick persons, writeth upon that occasion, in these words as follow in his own Saxons tongue.

Besides these Epistles above prefixed, of Elfricus to Wulfsinus, and Wulfstane, which fight directly against transubstantiatiō, mention was touched also before of certain Sermons to the number of lxxx. translated by the said Elfricus, out of Latin into the Saxon, that is, into our English tongue, as ye partly have heard before. Of the which lxxx. Sermons, xxiiij. were chiefly selected, to be read, as in stead of Hom • lies, or treatises, unto the people: in such order, as the first xii. Sermons or treatises, entreating of general matters (as De initio creaturae, de augurils, de die iudicij, vnius confessoris de vanilo • uio & negligentia, d • auaritia, de falsis dijs, &c. ) were appointed to be read at pleasure, & at the discretion of the Minister. The other xii. sermons were prescribed of proper feasts: (as De annūtiatione beat Mariae, de natiuitate domini, de circumcisione domini, de Epiphania, de purificatione sanctae Mariae. Dominica prima in Quadragesima, Dominica palmarum Die Pascae &c. Wherof this testimony remaineth in y ^e same book yet to be seen both in the Saxon tongue, and also in the Preface of the latter xii. Sermons in Latin, in these words following: In hoc codicillo con tinentur sermons Anglice, quos accepimus de libris quos Abbas Anglice transtulit. &c.

Furthermore as touching these lxxx. Sermons aforesaid, which El • ricus translated into English, here is to be understanded, that in the said Sermons used then orderly to be recited to y ^e people, there is one appointed to be red in die Sancto Pascae, that is, upon Easter day, Which Sermon being translated by the said Elfricus, we have here exhibited both in Saxon speech and in English, to the intent, that the Christian and indifferent reader perusing the same, may judge thereby, how the fantastical doctrine of transubstantiation, in those days of Elfricus & before his time, was not yet received nor known in the Church of England: for so much as the said Sermon being in Latin before, doth leave unto us an evident declaratiō, what was the common opinion of this Sacrament in the Church received: before that Elfricus did ever set hand to translate the same out of the Latin.

And though the Latin copies and exemplars of these foresaid Sermons, are not remaining in our Libraries, let y ^t be no marvel to thee, loving reader: but understand thereby the crafty packing of the Popes Clergy, who in the time of Lanfrancus, & Pope Innocent, studying by all means, how to prefer and further this their newcome doctrine of transubstantiation, did abolish and rase out of Libraries and Churches, all such books which made to the contrary. And therefore because Lanfrancus and other Italian Priests here in England understood not y ^e Saxon books as they did the Latin, all that which they understood, they made away. The Saxon books, because they knew them not, they let remain, And this is the cause why our Latin copies now are not to be found. Which to be true by iii. reasons coniectural it may probably be supposed.

First, for that these Saxon Sermons being translated out of the Latin (as ye have heard by the words of Elfricus already proved) only we see the Saxon books reserved: of the Latin none doth appear.

Secondly, there is yet remaining one certain piece or fragment of an epistle of Elfricus in the Library of Worcester, wherein, so much as maketh against the matter of transubstantiation, we have found in the middle of the said Latin epistle, utterly rased out, so that no letter or piece of a letter doth there appear. The words cut out, were these: Non est tamen hoc sacrifi • ium corpus eius, in quo passus est pro nobis ne{que} sanguis eius quem pro nobis effudit: sed spiritualiter corpus eius efficitur & sanguis, sicut Manna quod de caelo pluit, & aqua quae de petra fluxit. Sicut Paulus &c. 1. Notwithstanding this sacrifice is not the same body of his, wherein he suffered for us, nor the same blood of his: which he shed for us but spiritually it is made his body and blood as that Manna which rained from heaven and the water which did flowe out of the rock, as Paul. &c. These words so rased out are to be restored again by another Saxon book found in Exceter. By the rasing of which one place, it may easily be conjectured, what these practicers have likewise done in the rest.

Thirdly by one Italian trick of Polydore Uirgill in our days, the properties and doings of all other Italian papists of elder time, may partly be conjectured. For so I am informed by such, as precisely will affirm it to be true y ^t when Polydore being licensed by the king to view and search all Libraries, had once accomplished his story by the help of such books as he had compiled out of Libraries in y ^e end, when he had taken out what he would: like a true factor for y ^e popes own tooth, he piled his books together & set them all on a light fire. For what cause he so did, I cannot certainly pronounce: but who so considereth well his religion, may shrewdly suspect him. For a probatiō, whereof, this may serve for a sufficient trial: that whereas of all other writers of histories that have been in England, as of Fabian, Lanquer, Rastall, More, Leland, Balle, Halle, & such other, some of their books which they then occupied yet remain in hands to be seen. Only of such books, as Polydore used and which past his hands, what English man is he that hath seen, or can show me one? Whereby it may well be thought, the foresaid information to be true. As also by this one Italian trick of Polydore, may other Italians likewise be suspected, in making away such Latin books within this land, as made not for their purpose. But for so much as those Latin books be n • w abolished, and cannot be had, let us return to our Saxon tongue again, and see what this Saxon sermon of Elfricus translation, doth say for transubstantiation: The copy whereof here ensueth.

And thus I suppose, it standeth clear & evidently proved by course of all these ages afore recited, from the time of Tertullian and Agustine unto the days of this Elfricus above mentioned, and after him, that this newcome miracle of transubstantiation was not yet crept into the heads of men, nor almost came in any question amongst learned mē nor was admitted for any doctrine in the Church, at least for any general doctrine of all men to be received, til a M. year complete after Christ, that is, till that Satan began to be let at large. Apoca. 20. For whoever heard in all the primitive Church, or ever read in the works of the old ancient Doctors this question once to be asked, or disputed, whether any substance of bread and wine remained in the Lord's Supper? Or what man was ever so doltish to believe any such thing, or ever called heretic for not believing the same, before the time of seduction that is before the 1000. years aforesaid were expired.

Wherefore they that stand so much upon the antiquity of this Article as a doctrine which hath ever since Christ's time been received in the Church, taught by the Apostles, believed of all Catholics, and confirmed by consent of all ages, of Councils, of nations, and people unto this present day: these I say, either show them selves very ignorant in histories and in all state of antiquity or else most impudently they do abuse the simple credulity of the people.

To proceed now farther in this discussion of antiquity, it followed, that after the time of Elfricus aforesaid, this matter of transubstantiation began first to be talked off, & to come in question among a few superstitious monks: so that as blindness and superstition began more and more to increase, so the said gross opinion still more and more, both in number and authority prevailed, in so much that about the year of our Lord. 1060. the denying of transubstantiation began to be counted heresy.

And in this number first was one Berengarius a French man, and Archdeacon of Angeowe, which of all Christian men, which we read of, was first called and counted an heretic for denying of transubstantiation, & troubled for the same, as ye shall hear.

This Berengarius lived in the time of Pope Leo 9. Uictor, and Nicholas 2. which was about the year of our Lord. 1060. Albeit I do find our writers here in some discrepaunce. For the most of them do hold, that he first recanted under Pope Leo 9. in the Council of Uercellense: and afterward again under Pope Nicholas 2. about the year 1062. as is to be gathered of Gratian, De consecrate. dist. 2. Ego Berengarius, where he saith, that Pope Nicholas did send about to Bishops and Archbishops, the Copy of his recantation.

Again, by the Acts of the Council of Rome, it there appeareth, that the said Berengarius made this his said last recantation under Pope Hildebrand, called Gregory 7. But this difference of times is no great matter to stand upon. The truth of the story is this: that when Berengarius had professed the truth of the sacrament, & had stand in the open confession thereof, according to the ancient verity of the doctrine received in the Church before, he was so handled by certain malignaunt & superstitious monks that what by evil entreaty, and what for fear of death (such is the weak frailty of man) he began to shrink, and afterward did in deed recant the truth.

Of these malicious enemies against Berengarius, the chiefest troubler was Lancfranke, Abbot of Codune, afterward Archbishop of Canterbury, Guimond monk, likewise first of the abbey of Leufrede, & afterward Archb. of Auersane: Algerius also monk of Corbein: Fulbertus also monk and bishop: and Hildebrand sometime monk of Cluniake, and then Archdeacon of Turon, & afterward Bishop of Rome.

By these and such other monks of the like fraternity, the error and heresy of transubstantiation began first to be defended, and partes publicly in writing to be taken about that matter. Of the which sides and partes, the first that began to set up that faction by writing, seemeth to be Paschasius, who was a little before Berengarius about the time of Bertrame: and likewise Lancfrancke the first that brought it into England.

On the contrary side again, the first that was openly impugned and troubled for denying transubstantiation, was this Berengarius: with whom Lancfranck also was supposed at the first beginning to hold and take part, but afterward to clear himself, he stood openly against him in the Council, and wrote against him.

It followeth then in the Acte of the Council, that when the Synod of Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, and other Prelates were together assembled, y ^e greater number (saith the story) did hold, that the bread and wine were turned substantially into the body and blood of Christ. Notwithstanding (saith he) diverse there were in the said Council which held the contrary with Berengarius, but at last were driven to give over. Berengarius among the rest, after he had long stand in the constant defense of the truth, at last relented to their willes, confessing his error where none was, and desired pardon of the Council. And this was (as seemeth to W. Malmesb.) his first giving over. Who afterward returning to himself again after the death of Pope Leo, and prickte with the stinge of conscience, was driven again to recognise the truth, which he before had denied.

The Pope (saith Malmesb.) perceiving this, would not leave him so, but sent into France, Hildebrand his Cardinal Chaplain (as meet a mate for such a seat, as was in all Satan's court) and made him with a wany and to come again coram nobis: who so handled Berengarius and bringing him before the face of the Council bolden at Turon, that he made him to say, erraui, once again: against whom stood up in that Council Lanfrancus, and Guimundus aforesaid, impugning his assertion. And thus standeth the narration of W. Malmesbery. But by the acts of y ^e Council of Rome appeareth another declaration, which is, that this latter recantation of Berengarius should be at Rome under Hildebrand, being then Pope, in the yere of our Lord. 1076. and in the month of February, and that in the said Council holden in Ecclesia Saluatoris, this recantation of, Ego Berengarius, was made, and he enjoined by the said Pope Hildebrand, upon his oth, never hereafter to teache or dispute contrary to that faith of the Sacrament there holden. &c.

Again, Henry Bullinger in his book, De origin erroris, following belike some other author, expresseth the order of the foresaid recantation after this sort, and saith, that in the time of Pope Leo. 9. Anno. 1051. there was a Roman Council holden at Uercellense, in the which Council Lanfrancke being then present, the Book of John. Scotus was openly read, and there condemned. Also Berengarius was sent for, who seeing the prejudicial proceeding of that Council, refused himself to come, but sent two Clerks, which openly there defended his cause and quarrel, and were for the same committed unto prison. Such is the freedom of the Popes general Councils, w ^t prisons and violence to defend their verities. Against the doings of this Council notwithstanding, the French men stood stiff, both at Angew, and Turon, joining and consenting with Berengarius.

Not long after this, died Pope Leo, and after him succeeded Pope Uictor, by whom another Synod was kept at Florence, where the Acts and doings of the foresaid Council of Uercellense, were confirmed, and a Legate also appointed to be sent to Turon in France. This legate was Hildebrand above mentioned, who calling the clergy of France together in a Synod, fell there in hand with the cause of the Sacrament. Berengarius not being ignorant of these Romaine Councils, so kept himself, that in all his action, he would give none other answer, but that he believed and consented with the faith of the Catholic Church: & so for that time did frustrate the purpose of the council, rather deluding the pretēses of his enemies, then freely confessing the simple truth.

Again, after Uictor came Pope Nicholas 2. who congregating another Council at Rome, An. 1058. sent for Berengarius there to appear, who being present, argued what he could, for the justness of his cause, but all would not serve: In the Popes general Councils, such a stroke and mastership beareth authority above verity. Berengarius being thus borne down on every side by might & superiority, when no remedy would serve, but he must needs recant again (for the law of relapse was not yet in season) he desired to know what other confession of the sacrament the Pope would require of him, besides y ^t which he had there confessed. Then Pope Nicolas committed that charge to Humbart a Monk of Lotharinge, and after a Cardinal, y ^t he should draw out in formable words, the order of his recantatiō, after the prescription of Rome, which he should read and publicly profess before the people. The form of which words is registered in the Decrees, De consecrate. dist 2. Ego Berengarius. &c. The effect whereof is this: That he pretendeth with heart and mouth, to profess, that he acknowledging the true, catholic, and Apostolical faith, doth execrate all heresy, namely, that, wherewith he hath lately been infamed, as holding that the bread and wine upon the Altare, after the consecration of the Priest, remain only a Sacrament, and are not the very self body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, neither can be handled or broken with the priests hands, or chewed with the teethe of the faithful, otherwise then only by manner of a Sacrament Consenting now to the holy and Apostolical Church of Rome, he professed with mouth and heart, to hold the same faith touching the Sacraments of the Lord's mass, which the Lord Pope Nicholas, with his Synod here present doth hold, and commandeth to be holden by his Evangelical and Aposticall authority, that is, that the bread and wine upon the Altar, after consecration are not only a Sacrament, but also are the very true and self body, and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and are sensibly felt and broken with hands, and chewed with teethe: swearing by the holy Evangelists, that whosoever shall hold or say to the contrary, he shall hold them perpetually accursed, and if he himself shall hereafter presume to preach or teach against the same, he shall be content to abide the severity and rigor of the Canons. &c.

This cowardly recantation of Berengarius, as it offended a great number of the godly sort: so it gave to the contrary part no little triumph, whereby ever since they have taken the greater courage to tread down the truth.

〈1 page duplicate〉

It happened shortly after this, that Hildebrand the Popes graunde Captain, in the behalf of his Mayster Pope Nicolas, went in warfare against the Normandes. Which war being finished, shortly after, he set upon a new viage to fight for Pope Alexander, against Cadolus: which victory being also achieved, it was not long, but he put the new Pope Alexander beside the cushion, and was made Pope himself: so that during the busy stir of these wars, the Popes holiness had no laisure to attend the debating of this controversy of the Sacrament.

At length, when all was quieted, and Pope Hildebrand now was where he would be, his restless brain could not be unoccupied, but eftsoone summoneth a new Council at Rome in the Church of Lateran, to revive again the old disceptation of Berengarius, about the year (as some hold) 1079.

Thus Berengarius being toste by these Monks and Pharisees, was so confounded, and baited on every side, that partly for worldly fear, straining him on the one side, partly for shame and grief of conscience, that he had now twice renied the truth, on the other side, that the man (as is of him reported) after these such turbulent tragedies, forsaking his goods, his studies, learning, and former state of life, became a laborer, and wrought with his hands for living, all the residue of his life.

The opinion which Berengarius sustained touching the Sacrament (as by his own words in Lancfranckes book may appear) was this: The sacrifice of the Church consisteth of two things: The one visible: the other invisible, that is, of the Sacrament, and of the thing or matter of the Sacrament. Which thing (which is to mean, the body of Christ) if it were here present before our eyes, it were a thing visible & to be seen: but being lift up into heaven, and sitting on the right hand of his father, to the time of restoring of all thing (as S. Peter saith) it cannot be called down from thence. For the person of Christ consisteth of God and man: the Sacrament of the Lord's table consisteth of bread and wine, which being consecrate are not changed, but remain in their substances, having a certain resemblance or similitude of those things, whereof they be sacraments, &c. Ex Lib. Lancfranci.

By these words of Berengarius doctrine, all indifferent readers may see & judge, that he affirmed nothing but that was agreeable to the holy scripture, believing with S. Agustine, and all other ancient elders of the Church, that in the holy supper all faithful believers be refreshed spiritually, with the body & blood of the Lord, unto everlasting life. Wherefore most impudently they do misreporte him (as they do many other besides) which falsely lay to his charge, as though his teaching should be, that in the sacred supper of the Lord, nothing else were received of y ^e faithful, besides only y ^e bare signs, which is the bread & the wine.

And now that you have seen the doctrine of Berengarius, let us also take a vewe of the contrary teaching of Lanfrancus and his fellows, conferring and comparyng together the institution of the one side, with the institution of the other, to mark and consider which of them soundeth nearer to the truth of the scriptures. The words of Lanfrancke be these:

I believe the earthly substances, which upon the Lord's table are divinely sanctified, through the ministration of the Priest, to be converted unspeakably, incomprehensibly, and miraculously by the operation of God's mighty power, into the essence of the Lord's body, the outward forms only of the things themselves, and certain qualities reserved, and that for two respects: The one, least the sight of the raw and bloody flesh might otherwise make men to abhor from eating thereof for that they which believe the thing they see not, might have the greater merit for their belief. The conversion of which earthly substances into the essence of the Lord's body, notwithstanding, yet is the self same body of the Lord in heaven, and there hath his essential being at the right hand of his father immortal inuiolate, perfect, vndeminished, and uncorrupted: so that truly it may be affirmed, the self same body both to be received of us, and yet not the self same. The self same, I mean, as touching the essence, property, and virtue of his true nature: and yet not the self same as touching the forms of bread and wine, and other outward qualities incurring to our outward senses. &c. And thus have ye the confession of Lancfranke Archb. of Cant.

From this confession of Lancfranke, the opinion and assertion also of Guimundus Archb. of Auersane, doth nothing differ in grosenesse and impiety, but rather passeth the same, thus affirming and defending: That the body of Christ is pressed, and torn with teethe even like as it was felt and touched with the hands of Thomas.

And moreover, the said Guimundus (if his book be not rather counterfaited at Louaine) in the same place answering to an objection put out, that it is not lawful for Christ to be torn in pieces with teethe, doubteth not to pronounce that whether we take tearing for hard bitinge, or soft biting, it is not repugnant nor disagreeing, but that (by the will of God agreeing thereunto) the body of Christ may be touched with hands, bitten with mouth, crushed, yea and divided in pieces, with hard or soft pressing of the teeth: and that, as he was bruised upon the cross, according to the Prophet, saying: He was bruised for our iniquities, &c. so the same body for the health of the faithful, may devoutly be torn and rent with their teethe any thing to the contrary notwithstanding. &c. Guimund. lib. Sacrament. fol. 30. Judge now all good studious readers, what is to be thought of this kind of doctrine, and howe this opinion cohereth with the infallible voice of God's word, saying: Exod. And of him ye shall not break a bone. &c.

Thys rude and misshapen doctrine of these Monks, concerning transubstantiation, as ye have heard, whē and by whom it began first to be broached: so if ye would now know by what learning and scriptures they did confirm, and establish the same, ye must here think and understand, howe their chiefest grounds and substance to persuade the people was at this time, certain miracles by them forged, and published both in their writings and preachings whereof one was the same of Odo above recited, which Osberne, or some other monkish Legend invented of him, howe he should show unto certain the host turned into the likeness of flesh and blood droppinge into the chalice for the conversion of those clearkes, which before would not believe it.

An other like miracle is also told by the said Osberne of Dunstane in this order, how the said Dunstane appeared to a certain lame crepill in the night, willing him to resort unto his tomb, to have his limbs again restored. Which crepil, according as he was willed, after he had there continued praying for health a long time, and could not obtain, began to return home again after long tarrying, w ^t out all hope of recovery. To whom the said Dunstane appearing again by the way, asked from whence he came, and whether he would. The crepill answering, declared how he came thither upon hope of health, where he had long tarried, and because he could find no recovery, therefore he now was returning home. To whom then said Dunstane: I am (saith he) Dunstane the fellow servant of all God's servants, and have been occupied with certain necessary business, for the which I could not be present there with my children. For Elfrike (said he) otherwise surnamed Bata hath attempted to disherite my church, but I have so stopped him, that he could not prevail.

Many other fabulous miracles of the like stamp are rife in popish stories, counterfeited & forged under diverse and sundry names, some referred to Gregory, some to Paschasius, and to other moe, which to recite all, would fill a whole sea full of lies & fables. Among many, one is thus invented of Paschasius. There was a Priest, saith he, of Almain, named Plegildus, who did see and handle with his hands, visibly the shape of a child upon the altar & so after he had embraced and kissed him, it returned again to the likeness of bread, as he should come to the receiving thereof. This miracle when it was objected against Berēgarius, he merely deriding the blind fable, answered in these words: Speciosa inquit, pax nebulonis, vt cui oris praeberet basium, eo dentium in ferret exitium. That is, A goodly peace quoth he of a false verlet, that whō he before kissed with his mouth, by & by he goeth about to tear him with • is teeth.

An other miracle is reported of a Jew body, who upon a time entering into the Church, with another Christian lad which was his play fellow, saw upon the altar a little child broken & torn in pieces, and afterward by portions to be distributed among the people. Which sight when the young Jew coming home had told unto his father to be true and certain, he was for the same, condemned to be burned. Thus he being enclosed in a house, and the door fast where he should be burned, he was found and taken out from thence by the Christians, not only alive, but also having not one hear of his head blemished w ^t the flames about him. Who then being of the Christians, demanded howe he was so preserved from the burning fire: there appeared (said he) to me a beutiful woman sitting on a chair, whose son the child was, which was before divided & distributed in the Church among the people, who reached to me her hand in the burning flame, and with her gown skirtes kept the flame from me, so that I was preserved thereby from pearishing. &c. Belike these Monks lacked miracles among the Christians, when they were fain to borrow such figmentes of the Jews to prove their feigned transubstantiation.

And these commonly were then the arguments of these Monks, wherewith they persuaded the people to believe their transubstantiation. But to leave these monks fictions, & to return again to Berengarius, thus Malmesbury of him reporteth, that after he had once or twice recāted (as is aforesaid) yet notwithstanding this doctrine of the Sacrament still remained in the mind of his hearers. And how so ever the tyranny of the Pope did drive him thorough fear to deny his opinion, and wrought him much trouble, yet notwithstanding after his death he lacked not his well willers. In the number of whom was Hildebertus Bishop Cenomanensis, whose verses in commendation of his master, I thought here not unworthy to be preserved, being otherwise rare peradventure to be found in our story writers.

Althoughe in this time of Berengarus, which was about the year of our Lord. 1060. (as ye have heard) this error of transubstantiation began to grow in force and strength, by the supporting of certain popish monks above rehearsed, as Lancfrancus, Guimundus, Algerius, Hugo, Bishop of Lincoln. Fulbertus, (of whom it is said in stories, that our Lady gave him suck being sick, with her own breasts) and such other: yet notwithstanding, all this while the said Transubstantiatiō was decreed for no public law, nor doctrine to be holden by any general consent, either of the Church of Rome, or any other Council, before the Council of Lateran, under Pope Innocent the 3. who in the year of our Lord. 1215. celebrating in the church of Lateran, a general council of 1300. bishops, enacted there diverse constitutions, as of yearly confession, and the communion to be used of the whole multitude once a year through every parish church.

Item, for the recovery of the holy land, with a subsidy also to be leauied for the same.

Item for the abolishing of the books and writings of Joachim Abbas, and also the opinions of Almaricus afore mentioned: notwithstanding that y ^e said Joachim did subscribe with his own hand that he held the same doctrine, which was in the church of Rome, and also submitted his books to be presented to the Sea of Rome, there to be corrected or approved. And yet was he judged though not an heretic yet to be erroneous, & especially in those books which he wrote against Peter Lombard, calide afterward the master of Sentence.

In the said Counsel, besides diverse other constitutions and the Articles of the Creed there in order repeated, as appeareth, Extr. De summa trinit. & fide Catholica, cap. 1. firmiter, there was also enacted, decreed, and establyshed the faith and belief of Transubstantiation, in these words following.

There is one universal Church of the faithful, without which none can be saved, in the which Church the self same Jesus Christ is both Priest and also the sacrifice, whose body and blood are truly contained in the Sacrament of the altar, under the forms of bread and wine, the bread being transubstantiated into the body and the wine, into the blood, by the power and working of God: so that to the accomplishing of this mystery of unity, we might take of his, the same which he hath taken of ours. And this sacrament none can make or consecrate, but he that is a priest lawfully ordained, according to the keys of the Church, which Jesus Christ hath left to his Apostles, and to their successors. &c.

And thus was the foundation laid for the building of transubstantiatiō, upon the consent of these foresaid. 1300. Bishops, in the year of our Lord above specified, under pope Innocentius, and the doctrine thereof intruded for an article of faith into the church, necessarily to be believed of all men under pain of heresy.

But yet all this while, notwithstanding that the substaunte of bread and wine was now banished out of the sacrament, and utterly transcorporated into the substance ot Christ's very body and blood: yet was not this body eleuated over the priests head nor adored of the people till the days af pope Honorius the 3. succeeding after Innocentius, who by his counsel likewise commanded adoration and elevation to be joined with transubstantiation as one idolatry commonly bringeth forth another.

Agayne, the said sacramedt of the Lord's supper being now consecrated, transubstantiated, eleuated and adored yet it was not offered up for a sacrifice propitiatory for the quick and the dead, nor for a remedy of the souls in Purgatory, nor for a merit operis operati, sine bono motu vtentis. &c. before that other popes coming after, added still new aditions to the former inventions of their predecessors.

And thus have you the whole order and origin of these Idolatrous partes of the mass described by their times & ages, which first began with consecration and the form thereof, which were words of the Canon. Then came transubstantiation by Innocentius, and after eleleuation & adoration by Honorius, and last of all came the oblation meretorious and propitiatory for the quick and dead in remission of sins, Ex opere operato.

Which things being thus constituted by the to much usurped authority of the church of Rome, shortly after followed persecution, tyranny and burning among the Christians, first beginning with the Albigenses, and the faith full congregation of Toulouse, near about the time of the said Innocentius, as is afore remembered. pag. 271.

And thus much for the first article of transubstantiatiō which (as ye have heard) was not admitted into y ^e Church for any general doctrine of faith, before the year and time above assigned, of pope Innocent the third, and therefore if any have been otherwise persuaded, or yet do remain in the same persuasion still of this doctrine, as though it had been of a longer continuance then frō the time above expressed, let him understand that by ignorance of histories he is deceived, and for the more satisfyinge of his mind, if he credit not me, let him believe the words of one of his own catholic sort, John Duns I mean, who in his 4. book writing of Transubstatiation, in what time and by whose authority it was first establieshd, hath these words, which also are before mentioned, pag. 257. These words of the Scripture might be expounded more easily and more plainly without transubstantiatiō: but the Church did choose this sense, which is harder, being thereto moved (as seemeth) chiefly because men should hold of the Sacraments, the same which the Church of Rome doth hold. &c. And further in the same place the said Duns expounding himself what he meaneth by the church of Rome, maketh there express mention of the said Innocentius the 3. and of this Council of Lateran. &c.

And furthermore, to the intent that such as be indifferent seekers of the truth, may be more amplie satisfied in this behalf, that this transubstantion is of no antiquity, but of a late invention: I will also adjoin to this testimony of Johan. Scotus, the judgment and verdict of Erasm. lib. Annot. where he writeth in these words: In Synaxi transubstantiationē sero definiuit Ecclesia. Diu satis erat credere sieve sub pane consecrato, sieve quocun{que} modo adesse verum corpus Christi. &c. That is, In the sacrament of the communion, the church concluded transubstantiatiō but of late days. Long before that it was sufficient to believe the true body of Christ to be present either under bread, or else by some manner. &c.