is god the maker of nature can bringe it to passe in his body that is to saye that first the bread should be turned into his bodye and the wyne into his bluod and after then that it should be whole in the whole hoste and in the cupp and whole in euery parte of the sacrament and that it should be in dyuers places If he can do those thinges and will doo them as we vnderstand by the words of the sacrament the whiche say this is my bodye shewing the bread and this is my bluod sh◅winge the wyne then they be done because it is written in the psalme Quaecunque uoluit fecit dominus All thinges that the lord wold do he did I answer first to the reason it self and after I will speake of the similitudes To the reason that is to say if god can do it therfore he hath done it I say that it awayleth not and it is already answered before in oure seauenth reason that god doth not all that he can do as we geue the example of the twelue thousand legions of Aungels the which god if he wold could haue sent to help Christ and yet he sent them not God can bringe to passe that we all maie walke vpon the sea without shippes as some tyme Christ did And as it is written in the boke of wysdom and yet he doth it not Oure question is not whether god can do it or no but it is whether god hath done it or no. Thei saiyes and we saye no It belongeth to them to proue that he hath done it and that he doth it a fresh the which they shall neauer do nor can neauer bringe it to passe by gods word this is a suer rule Concerninge that they go aboute to saye that god had desire to do it this is not onely false but most false What reason is this Christ sayd this is my body shewinge the bread and this is my bluod shewinge the wyne therfore he will that the bread should be turned into his body and the wyne into his bluod or at the least that he should be in the sacrament in such sort as they say This reason doth not deserue any answer for so much as Christ by these words ment not to saye any other but that the bread and the wyne were a sacramēt and signes of his body and bluod and ment not to saye that which they affirme as before we haue so often declared The exāples or similitudes that they bringe furth be not to the purpose and thei be rather dissimilitudes then otherwise The example of Moyses rodd turned into the serpent and after the serpent turned into the rod and of the waters turned into bluod it is not like because the serpent Note further that in turninge of Moyses rod of the water into bluod and such other myracles the senses did witnes the chaunge of the thinges which holdeth not in the transubstantiation into the which the rodd was turned was not before but was newly made Likewise that bluod into the which the waters were turned was newlye made and was not before but Christes body and his bluod were and be before the bread They put certayne turninges against nature not maruelous but rather monstrous and Imaginatiue Let them geue me but one example in the hole scripture that god eauer turned one thinge into another that was before they shall not fynde it How dare they then be so bold to affirme such a thinge yea that which is more to go aboute to make men beleue it as an article of the fayth and yet thei cannot neather proue it by gods worde nor bringe furth any example that eauer any lyke thinge was done The example of the heauen that it is in oure eye which is litle is nothinge worthe because the heauē is not really in oure eye but there is onely the image or the similitude of the heauen the which similitude is litle as the eye nor it is not vnconuenient that the similitude or the Image of a great thinge shuld be litle as the Image of Cesar was in the coyne that was shewed to Christ by the pharisees the Image of Cesar was in that coyne the which was much lesse then Cesar himself and neuertheles it did represent Cesar who was great and much greater then that Image We will say the like of the Image of the man in the glasse the which althoughe that it be muche lesse then the man yet it doth represent the man This is no great matter that the Image of agreat thinge should be litle but it should be agreat matter that agreater body should be conteined in one much lesse as they say of Christ that great and thick as he was vpō the wood of the crosse and as presently he is in heauen he should be whole conteyned in a litle cake They that geue these examples of heauen and of the thinges that be seen in glasses do not proue that agreat bodye is conteyned in a litle as they say of Christ that he is conteyned in the hoste but they proue onely the Image or similitude of agreat thinge may be whole in a litle thinge the which we denie not but if the similitude or image of agreat thinge be in a litle thinge this is because that that Image it self also is litle and no greater then that body wher in it apereth yea it is lesse so that these exāples be not to the purpose To the other similitudes I say also that they auayle not that of the soule that it should be whole in the whole bodye and whole in euery parte of the bodye This is because the soule seing that it geueth lyfe to all the bodye as it is playne must nedes be in euery parte of the bodye for so much as that seinge it geueth lyfe not onely to the whole body but to euery parte of the same It is necessarye that it should be in all the partes because that if it were not in any parte that parte should not be a lyue And because that the soule wheresoeauer it is of necessitye it must be whole there being vndyuidable and not hauing partes because it is a spirite there fore it is necessary that the soule be whole in the whole and whole in euery parte of the body but Christes body not being a spirite and hauinge many partes beinge longe brode and thinke cannot be whole in the whole and whole in euery parte of the place where he is and as it is repugnaunte to a bodye to be a spirite so is it repugnant to it to be vndeuydhable in a place To the other similitude of oure face the which is whole in the whole and whole in euery parte of the glasse after this sorte that is to saye that when the glasse is broken the Image of the face is in euery peece of the glasse I say they be deceaued nor it is not true that one Image is in all those peeces of the glasse when it is
to the priests and fryers shall receaue a hunderth fould and shall possesse the lyfe euerlasting Thus marre they lykwyse other saings of the holy scripture In old tyme this offering was bestowed on the poore by the deacons hands but now euery man knoweth to what vse it turneth When the offertory is done the hoste not yet consecrated is offered as they say and this prayer is said O holy father almighty euerlasting god take this vnspotted host which I thie vnworthy seruaunt do offer to the my liuing and trew god formy innumerable sinnes offences and negligences and for all the standers by and for all the faithfull Christians liuing and dead to the intent it may be profitable to me and to them for helth to lyfe euerlasting amen In this praier is said that that bread whiche they call the host is offered to god for the sinnes of all the faithfull liuinge and dead and also desireth that it may be profitable for health to lyfe euerlasting These are suerly great effects and it is much to be marueled at how this host not yet consecrated can do as they thinck these things that is to say to auayle to forgeuenes of sinnes and to lyfe euerlasting how can this be that a pece of bread which is but bread should worke so great effects I can not â—â—ceaue this I wold they wold proue it me by gods word And yf they wold say that they speake such words not by that which is then bread but by that that it shal be after the consecration they can not with trueth speake it for that host when it â—…all be consecrated shall not be any more bread 〈◊〉 they think no nor shall not be any more the same but another thinge for before it be consecrated and when this prayer is said it is onely â—…ead and when it is consecrated it is the trew boâ—… of Christ and no more materiall bread as they â—…ink And they in this praier speak of that hoste â—…hich they then offer sainge O holly father alâ—…ighty god take this vnspotted host shewing the â—…read not consecrated and they meane to speak of â—…hat that they shew and that it is then not that 〈◊〉 shal be Also the Cannon it self in the first parte â—…hich sayeth Quam oblationem tu deâ—…s c. declareth that it is spoken of the bread â—â—d wyne vnconsecrated as it apereth in that plaâ—…e Then this maner host that they then shew how â—…n it forgeue sinnes and saue men The Iewes in â—…ede offered such things for sinÌ„es but the Christians whose offering as Peter saith in his Epistel are spirituall offer not such things to god for there sinnes being suer that they are forgeuen them by Christ onely and not by any other thing This prayer therfore is wicked as many other are that are said in the Masse When the host is offered and the wine in the challice they also put to it water which thing they say that Alexander the first pope ordened First to shew that the health of the peple which is signified by the water acording to the saing of the Apocalipse Aquas quas uidisti ubi me retrix sedet populi sunt gentes linguae could not be without the sheding of Christs blode nor the blud shedding without the health of the people therfore it is necessarie that to betoken this the water should be mingled with the wine SecoÌ„dly it is to declare that there issued out of Christs syde together with the blood water in token that Christ is not without the people nor the people without Christ. Thirdly the water is mixt with the wyne to tell that there is in Christ the manhode together with the god head which towe things are betokened by the water and the wine the manhode by the water and the god hed by the Wyne I wil not at this present take on me the burdene of reprouing Alexander but I will yet tell what I thinke that in the Sacrament there ought to be made respecting those thinges that be the substance of them no maner of chaunge nether to encrease nor to diminish It is alreadâ—… knowen that Christ did not institute the Sacrament of the holy super with any other elements then with bread and wyne and that no water in it nor the apostels as farr as we vnderstand by there writings haue added any other thinge This me think shuld suffise Then euen as it belongeth not to any man in the world but to god and Christ that is god and man to institute Sacraments so ought no liuing man to diminish it and seme to vnderstand more theÌ„ the ordeiner Who is that inferiour that wold alter or chaunge the lawes or ordinaunces of his superiour after this sort then men might doo in baptisme they might put to wyne and alledge the cause as is aledged of the water why should water be rather put to the wyne in the Sacrament of the holy super then wyne to the water in the sacrament of baptisme was not the godhed and manhede aswel in baptisme as in the holy supper Yea they were more plainely betokened wheÌ„ Christ was baptised for that that was the fathers voyce the holy gost was seene in shape of a doue which things neuer chaunced in the supper so far as we vnderstand by the Euangelists and writinges of the apostles And whie cannot the godhed and maÌ„hed be betokened by wyne and water aswel in the one Sacrament as in the other Forthermore none except the ordeiner hath authoritie to geue a new betokening to the SacrameÌ„t Christ hath apointed what the bread and wine shuld betoken that is to saye that the bread shuld betoken and bringe to remembraunce the bodye and the blud and it belongeth not to vs to chaunge to put to or take fro the betokenings of suche things And this opinion here saith that the wyne betokeneth the godhead and Christ hath or deined that it shuld betoken and bringe to oure remembraunce his blud There is a great difference betwene the blud and the godhed for the blud is a creature but the godhed is god the Creator Lastly Paule who was taught of Christ as he wryteth to the Corinthians after what sort this Sacrament ought to be handeled maketh no maner mention of water and he durst not put to any thinge besyde that which Christ had taught him And by what authoritie I pray you go they and add to the Sacraments suerly this water ought not to be added Then next the priest offereth the cupp sainge We offer to the oh lord the cupp of health besechinge thye mercyfulnes that it may ascend with a swete sauoure into the sight of thy deuine maiestie for oure health and all the worldes Amen The self same that we haue sayd of the hoste or bread we may and ought to say of the cupp or wyne How can it be that the wyne not yet consecrated maye auayle for oure health and the whole worlds We will tary till they can
in the last supper saing to the Corynthyans Hoc n accepi a DnoÌ„ ê™ tradidi nobis c. 1. Chorin 11. That is that wich I receiued of the lord deliuered I vnto you That pure and holy order geuin by Christ and kept with so great reuerence by his apostels ought to haue suffised vs and not to make so many addicions which blemissh I wil not say beray the purenes of the sacrameÌ„t as thei haue done of baptym to which they haue ioyned salt oyle spyttel coniuring which things neither Iohn Baptist whan he baptised Christ nor the apostels did euer vse And thes which with reuerence doo kepe Christes appointment and with humblenes doo obey him are now cownted for heretikes as though thei were more bownd to obey men than god Let euery faithfull Christyan iudge iff we say the treuth This fift part of the canon geueth to vnderstand clerely that by thes wordes offerings sacryfices and giftes is vnderstand the wine not yet consecrated And that thei be none other but breade and wyne ffor he desireth that thei may become the body and blood of Christ So that according to the canon the bare simple breade and the bare simple wyne are a sacrifice for the redempcion of sowles and for saluacyon as in the ij part hath bene sayd We may not here glose that the Canon intendeth that the breade and wyne whan they shall be turned in to the body and blood as thei say shall be a sacrifice for the raunsominge of sowles for it meaneth of that breade and of that wyne which are to become the body and blode Now is it certen yea affter their own mind that that breade and that wyne which are yet to become the body and blood of Christ are bare playne breade and bare wyne And yet the Canon sayth that thei be a sacrifice for the raunsominge of sowles which is a plaine wickednes The syxt part of the Canon saith The which that is to say Chryst of whom is made mencion in the former part the day before he suffered The sixt parte of the canoÌ„ of the masse whith the consecration toke the bread in his holy and honorable handes here the priest taketh the host in his handes and addeth And his eies beinge lift vp into heauen to the god his father almyghty yelding to the thanckes he blessed And here is made a crosse vpon the host and is added he brake and gaue to his discyples saing Take and eate all of this ffor this is my body And here the host is liffted vp and caused to be honored a thing which christ hath not appointed But why is not the breade than broken as Christ did seing he commanded that thei shuld doo this in his rememberance And not to cause the breade or wine to be honored Whan this is done the host is laid down vpon the aulter and the cupp is taken in hand and the other part which is the seauenth part is said that is to say Likewise whan thei had supped taking this noble cupp in his holy and honorable handes The vij parte of the CanoÌ„ of the masse rendring thanckes again vnto the he blessed and heâ—…e is made a crosse ouer the cupp and added And â—…aue to his disciples saing Take and drinck all of â—…his for this is the cupp of my blood of the newe â—…nd euerlasting testament a mistery of the faith â—…he which shall be shed for yow and for many for â—…he remission of sinnes so offt as yow shall doo thes things yow shall doo them in my remembraÌ„ce And saing thes last wordes the cupp is lifft vp and caused to be honored as we haue said of the host that is to say all to gether contrary to christes ordinance In thes ij partes is made the consecracion of the breade and wine And in the consecracion of the bread are added ij wordes that are not in the euaÌ„gelistes that is to say that word enim and that other Ex hoc oeÌ„s And in the coÌ„secracioÌ„ of the wine are added ij other that is eterni aÌ„d misteriuÌ„ fidei which likewise are not in theeuaÌ„gelistes And it is to be marueled seing the defeÌ„ders of the masse say that with Christes wordes the consecracion is made and that thei ought not to add or minissh them and so moch the rather as thei them selues say that Christ gaue the powre of consecracion to thos wordes that he spake not to any other how durst thei be bold to ad any one word I will not now say that by this the sentence is changed Neuertheles seing we ought not to vse any other wordes than thos same that Christ spake because he gaue the powr of consecracion to thos only and not to any other as thei say and that we caÌ„not knowe certenly what wordes thei shuld be but by the euaÌ„gelistes or by paule And finding thos wordes that the canon doth add neither in theuangelistes nor in paule it is a great rasshnes to add them Here the Rational or cause teller of diuine officis saith that the apostels had the maner of the consecration from Christ and we from thapostels And that it is not to be merueled though these wordes which seme added be not fownd in the euangelistes and yet spokeÌ„ by christ For the euangelistes for shortnes haue past ouer many things which the apostels haue supplied And he giueth thexample of the visioÌ„ which Paul declareth in the 1. to the corinthiaÌ„s 1. Cor. 15 that Christ affter his resurrection appeared to moo than v. hondreth brethern of which vision theuangelistes make no mencyon at all and yet it was trewe He alledgeth also that amoÌ„g theuangelistes one declareth one thing and a nother leauith owt the same c. All this is trewe that theuaÌ„gelistes haue leffe owt certeÌ„ things which were done aÌ„d allthoughe the one supplieth that which the other leaueth owt this maketh not that we ought to add to the wordes of the euangelistes chefely to them of the consecracion to which wordes only Christ according to their oppinion hath geuen powr to change the breade in to the body and the wine in to the blood and not to any other Who doth asserten vs that Christ spake this word enim aÌ„d thes other words aded that is to say Ex hoc oeÌ„s aÌ„d thos other ij that is to say aeterni and misteriuÌ„ fidei We be certeÌ„ of the appearing of Christ to moo than v. hondreth brethern because Paul to whom christ did reueale it hath writon it But if Paul had not writon it and finding it not in the gospell how could it be certenly known And how shall we be bownd to beleue it Likewise this is the cause why things lefft owt by one euangelist are knowen because a nother doth tell them but if all had lefft them owt how could we certenly knowe theÌ„ O sai thei the church had it froÌ„ the Apostels Saist thow so how doest thow knowe it I will not beleue
the how many things are sayd of the Apostels aÌ„d are attributet to theÌ„ which neauer were We might than affter this sort attribute to the Apostels what we wold Paul writing to the Choryntes 1. Corith 11. teacheth them the forme of the dedicacion of the breade and the wyne and sayth that he had it of the lord and yet he putteth not in any of thes wordes and yet surely for all that he teacheth to consecrate well Why than doth he not putt in thes wordes Iff in the consecration there were nothing considered but the senteÌ„câ—… it made no matter though some words were added or minisshed so that the senteÌ„ce were not altered But the consideracion here is of the wordes that is to say what thei be to which Christ hath geuen the powr to consecrate and to them it behoueth not to add or to minissh All this I say according to their opinion For thei wold that Christ shuld haue geuen the vertew of consecrating to the wordes which he himselff spake and not to other And yet thes wordes that I say are added be neither in theuangelistes nor in Paule Here must we say that Paul taught not to consecrate well because he spake them not Or els iff Paul taught to consecrate well that Christ spake not thos wordes And if Christ spake them not thei haue vsed a great rasshnes that haue added them specyally hauing that opinion that thei haue of the consecracion that is to say of the powr geuen to thos wordes only that Christ pronownced Moreouer what is the cause that in the consecracion of the bread are not putt in thes wordes which christ pronouÌ„ced that is Quod ê“uobis datur which is giuen for yow as Luke saith or els ê™ pro uobis tradet aÌ„d fraÌ„gitur which is brokeÌ„ for yow as Paul saith as in the coÌ„secratioÌ„ of the wine there be thes wordes Which shall be shed for yow and for many for the remission of sinnes the body being no lesse geuen for our redempcion than the blood Why haue thei in this part maymed the wordes of the consecracion of the breade and not thos of the consecracion of the wine let euery man Iudge if this ought to be done But this is the best of the matter that the defenders of the masse to mainteine it say that that breade and that wyne is changed the one in to the body that is to say the bread and the other in to the blood that is the wyne And are muche combered because thei can not tell what is shewed by this demonstratiue Hoc whan is said Hoc est corpus meuÌ„ that is to say this is my body If by this word Hoc be shewed the breade the saing is false because the breade is not changed in to the body till all the wordes of the consecracion be vttered Iff the body be shewed it semeth that the body shuld be there before the wordes were spoken and before the consecracion shuld be made And we haue the like to say of the wordes of the consecracion of the wine which thing is declared whan is said Hoc eÌ„ n. saÌ„guis meus c. Iff the wine be shewed it is false that the wine shuld be blood If the blood be shewed it semeth that the blood shuld be there before the consecration were made Which thing caÌ„not be And therfor some say affter one sort and some affter a nother and to be short thei knowe not what thei may say One saith that this Hoc doth shewe partly to the sence and partly to the vnderstonding And this is the meaning of thes wordes this is my body that is to say that into which this thing shall be transsubstantiate is my body And this is the opinion of Rychard of S. Victor in his boke of the trinitye CerteÌ„ other say that the with comes of the breade are shewed And this is my body is as moch to say as in this is my body Some other say that this pronown Hoc is taken materially and doth not shewe any thing whan it is pronownced in the coÌ„secracioÌ„ But christes wordes only are repeated To other the contray appeareth ffor whan Christ pronownced thos wordes he shwed some thing and did consecrate Therfor now also being the same wordes and hauing the selff same vse that thei had whan Christ spake them thei shall haue the selff same significacion And euen as Christ than shewed some thing so now must some thing be shewed Innocentius the iij. in his bokes of the office of the masse doth hold that Christ coÌ„secrated with other words thaÌ„ thes Hoc est corpus meuÌ„ and Hic eÌ„ calix saÌ„guinis mei Some other haue said that the powr of consecrating is geuen to thes wordes that is to say that at the vttering of them is made he traÌ„ssubstaÌ„ciacion Some other say and amoÌ„g he rest master Durant that Christ first did consecrate with a diuine powr not knoweÌ„ to vs and affter he declared the fasshioÌ„ with which affter him meÌ„ shuld consecrate For Christ blessed with his own powr but we doo blesse by the vertu that he hath geuen to the wordes with which men coÌ„secrate that is Hoc est corpus meum and hic est sanguis meus And whan the priest pronownceth thes wordes the breade is changed into the body and the wine in to the bloode There be other that say that Christ consecrated with other wordes than thes Hoc est corpus meum and that he consecrated whan he blessed Peter coÌ„mestor saith that Christ consecrated with thes wordes Hoc est corpus meum and hic est sanguis meus but he spake them sofftly to him selff and changed the breade in to the body and the wine in to the blood and affter he repeated them with a lowd voice to the apostels Other some say that Christ pronownced the wordes twise first to geue them the vertu of consecrating and affter he pronownced the same wordes to teach the apostels the fasshon of consecrating and this opinioÌ„ is litle differing from the former Some other say that the breade and the wine are both consecrated together that is to say whan the wine is consecrated than is the breade consecrated and not before Other some say that the breade first is consecrated and affâ—…er the wine Abowt the forme of consecrating of the wine some say as Bonauenture in the iiij of the sentences the viij distinction and many other that thes wordes hic est calix sanguinis mei be of the substance of the forme of consecrating the wine the other which be added that is to say Noui aeter ni testamenti be only to furnissh Thomas of Aquine in the iij. part of his somm saith that all thes wordes be of the substance Scotus saith that being vnknowen for certenty whether thei be of the substance of the form or not that men ought not to determine that it shuld be so but thei ought to say all as iff thei were of
the substance of the forme albeit that comonly the doctors agree with Bonauenture And here is to be noted that according to the opinion of Scotus it is not yet knowē what shuld be the wordes of cōsecracion of the wine but in part It is sure that he said the truth that neither he nor Bonauenture nor Thomas of Aquina nor as many moo scole doctors as be defenders of the masse euer knewe certenly the very poinctt which shuld be the partes of consecracion And this is the profe theroff For iff thei had knowen it there shuld not haue bene so great a diuersitie and confusion of opinions as we haue sene And we could yet iff we wold speake of others This their so gret diuersitie sheweth plainely that thei neuer knewe it nor neuer were certen of the matter And it is most certen that iff the opinion that thei defend were trewe there shuld neuer haue bene so many and so diuers opinions What a vaine thing is it than to say that by the vertu of certen wordes shuld be made a changing of the breade and the wyne in to the body and blood of Christ which thing not withstonding by the holy scripture cānot be shewed that is that by the vertu of certen wordes the substance of things shuld be chāged and of the other part not to knowe or not to be certen which shuld be thos wordes Thei speake also in such sort of this consecratoin that affter their owne opinion the church or the peple that heare the masse are neuer certen whether the consecracion be made or not For the master of sentencis saith in the iiij that the heretikes can not bring it to passe that is to say to consecrate And also he saith yow must haue the intent for otherwise yow consecrate not And who can be certen either of the faith or of the intēt of him that celebrateth Surely no man being such things in the consciens of man which none seith but god and he that celebrateth Therfor the peple that heare the masse is neuer certen whan the consecracion is made and whan not The cause whi this confusiō is amōg them first is because thei knowe not properly what maner of thing consecracion is For consecracion meaneth one thing and thei thinck it shuld haue a nother meaning Besides thei beleue or at the least cause mē to thinck that thei beleue and thei preach the same as an article of the faith that that breade and that wine is changed th one in to the trew ād substāciall body of Christ that is to say the breade the other that is to say the wyne in to his blood And thei say that Christ really in body ād sowle as gret and as thick as he was vpon the wood of the crosse and as now he is in heauen is wholly in that litle host and wholly in that cupp where the wine was And thei will that here there shuld come to gether many miracles and thei hold that this meruelos change which thei call transsubstanciaciō shuld be done by the vertu of thos wordes of the consecracion And thei will that consecraciō doth meane changing of breade in to the body and of wine in to the blood made with thes wordes So that they make this consecracyon as the inchanters were wont to make their inchantmēts with certē wordes wich they being deceiued by the deuel thinck to haue vertu to worke certen wōderfull effectys So doo they that thinck with thes wordes spoken softly ouer the breade and the wyne to change by vertu of the same the bread and the wyne in the body and blood of Iesus Christ Thes ij be the causes why they know not with what wordes the consecratyō is made nor whā it is made ffor hauing that opinyon that they haue that is to say that there is made that meruelous change of bread ād wine thes wordes hoc est corpus meum make than the difficultye and they knowe not what thing is shwesd by this word hoc For iff the breade be shewed the saing appeareth falss vnto them because the breade is not the body of Christ tyll all the wordes be spoken and whan they shewe the breade the wordes be not yet spoken Than seing the body is not yet there there can not be shewed by this word hoc the body which yet is not And if they say they shewe the body by this hoc that saing hoc est corpus meum semyth to them vntrew likewise for seing the body is not yet there in that host it can not be shwed in it And thus not knowing how to make trewe that saing what soeuer sort they shuld speake it they goo abowt writhing it a thowsand maner of ways ād wold fayne help the matter if they could but they fynd not the way for god will not As it chāced to Pharaos coniurers that could not doo that they wold Exo. ◅ So thei wold yet for all that holding that opinyon they hold and for to geue credyt to the masse they wold yet I say make that saing agree with this theyr opinion but there is no meanes how Let them turne it yet as they will theyr opynyon standing Christes saing hoc est corpus meum cannot be made trewe Thā theyr opynynō is most false which cānot stād with gods truth that is to say his word It is chanced also to them as to thos that wold haue bylded the gret tower of Babilon and haue made it meruelos high as it is writon in Genesis Gene. ◅ but god confused their tonges that one dyd not vnderstand a nother allthough that all did agre to the bylding of it Euē so it hapnyth to thes carpēters or builders of the masse wich also wold if they could lifft it vp euen to heauen and make it be cownted as a godly thing and an high worship And thei all are agreed to this workmanship And because they see that iff thei hold not that the trew body of Christ is in the host ād his trew ād naturall blood in the cupp the masse shuld not be in price or any estimacion but rather by and by shuld decay therfor aboue all things thei take hede to this to persuade and by all meanes thei can to make the peple beleue that Christ is really and bodily in that host and that cup. Neuertheles god hath confused their tōgs ād their mindes in to so many waies and opiniōs in to so diuers fansies ād spechis that the one is disagreing ād cōtrary to the other This is now a plain and a manifest tokē that this workmāship pleaseth not god and finally shall fall to the grownd to the intent that the saing of Iesus Christ may be verified that eueri plantinge which the heauinly father hath not planted shall be rooted vp Mat. 15. We doo not now intend to goo abowt to proue here that that their opinion is false that is to say that the breade and wine shuld be changed
the one in to his body and thother in to his blood because we shuld make to long a digression from our purpos But with gods fauor whan we haue ended this discours of the masse and the masse booke we will in the end of the boke Ioine to it a plaine sermon of this matter in the which we will proue the treuth And for this time we will make it onli appeare that thei vnderstōd not what consecraciō meaneth Therfor yow must vnderstād that Cōsecrare affter the holy scripture meane◅h not to chāge one thing in to a nother by vertu of certen wordes as thei take and vnderstand the consecracion of bread and wine minding that it shuld be a changing of their substances in to other substancis that is to say in to the body and blood of Iesus Christ For a thing that is consecrated is not marred or destroied that it shuld not be any more the same that it was as thei say of the breade and wine that thei remaine no longer affter the consecracion but are vndone and destroied and be no more that thei were but the thing that is consecrated remaineth the selff same that it was first and is not altered in his substance but only is dedicate or appointed to a certen holy vse to the which first it was not appointed or ordeined This is the meaning of consecrare As for example And how 's is said to be cōsecrated to god whan it is appointed to some holy vse as a man wold say to the preaching of gods word to the administracion of the sacraments and to comō praier Euen so man is consecrated to god whan he is dedicated and appointed to an holy and secred vse of gods seruice All christians be consecrated to god that is to say dedicated and appointed to his seruice which is an holy thing because thei be the trewe temple of god in the which he dwelleth with his holy spirite as S. Paul saith in many places 1. cho 3. 2. cho 6. Ephe. 2. Now it appearith that the man remainith still the same and is not changed in substance because he is consecrated to god but only is dedicated and appointed to gods seruice to which he was not first appointed This which we say we say not of our selues but owt of the holy scripture in mani places Exo. 13.29 num 6. Leuiti 27. as in Exodus numerus leuiticus It is writton in exodus that euery first borne male shuld be consecrate to god as well of men as of beastis Also that Aron and his childern were consecrated to be priestes It apperith in numerus as well of men as wemen that were consecrated to god In the last of leuiticus where is spoken of the consecracion of men and of feldys and vniuersally of eueri consecrated thing It appeareth that that consecracion doth not meane to change one thing in to another with wordes but meaneth to dedicate and appoint and as a man wold sai to appropriate a thing to god and to an holy vse Euery thing that is cōsecrated to the lord saith god whether it be mā beast or felde shall not be sold nor can not be redemed or raunsomed And thes were the consecracions made in the lawe which although we doo not now vse yet neuertheles thei giue vs to vnderstand what Consecrare meaneth and that it importeth nothing els but to dedicate ād appoint a thing to an holy vse And so we will say of the consecracion of breade and of wine that it is no changing of their substancis made by vertu of wordes but it is an appointing to an holy vse that is to say that thei shuld signifie and bring to our remembrance the body and blood of Christ how he gaue them for our redempcion As he him selff said whan he instituted this holy sacrament of breade and wine Matth. 26. Marc. 14. Luc. 22. 1. Corint 11. saing that thei shuld doo this in his remembrance We haue bene long in this our talk which we haue done for the ignorant and not for the lerned and becaus the matter is waighty THE III. CHAPTER This examineth the viij part of the canon and declareth how he that saith the masse vsurpeth that office that is Christes and also saith a most wicked praier which is a gret wrong to Christ THe viij part of the canon is this that is to say Wherfor we thy seruantes and thy holy peple remembring vs of christ thy sonn our lord of so blessed a passion and resurrection from the deade and of the glorios ascēsion in to the heauens doo offer to thy most excellēt maiestie of thy rewardes and gifftes the pure host the holy host the vnspotted host and here saing thes wordes are made iij. crosses ouer the host and ouer the cup consecrated to gether that is to say ouer both of them And affter he addeth Holy breade of life euerlasting and the cup of continuall helth And here ij other crosses be made the one whan the bread is named ouer the same host and the other ouer the cupp whan the same is named In this viij part is affirmed that the priest and the peple by the remembrans that thei haue of his death resurrection and ascension doo offer vnto god that host and that cupp consecrated which be as thei think the trewe body and very blood of Christ. But where is it fownd in all the whole scripture that Christ or god did euer ordein that either the priest or the peple shuld offer vnto god the body and blood of Iesus Christ In dede we find that we ought to make a memory of such an offering as christ hath made And therfor he hath ordeined this sacrament to thintent that we shuld vse the remembrance of that oblacion But that we ought to offer to god either the body or the bloode of his sonn that hath god not appointed vs nor yet Christ nor ani Apostel euer made mēcion of it For this office to offer vnto god the body and blood of christ belongeth only to christ who is the high ād euerlasting priest Heb. 7.9.10 and it belongeth not to vs. And the some christ hath done it ones for all whan he was offered and died vpon the crosse And it nedeth not to doo it offtner because that that only time hath suffised to satisfie god for the sinnes of all the elect And that which we doo now in the sacrament is not the offering of Christes body ād blood but is a memory of that offering And who knoweth not that the memory of a thing is not the selff same thing but a remēbrance of it And if ani wold say for all this that it belōgeth to christians to offer christ in the sacramēt because Peter saith that the Christiās be an holy priesthoode to offer spirituall offrings acceptable to god by Iesus christ To this I say that Peter meaneth not here to speake of the sacrament but meaneth of thos hostis
that is to say spirituall sacrifices the which not only the priestes but all christiās may and ought to offer vnto god accepted by Iesus Christ. And thes hostes or sacrifices we be first our selffes which ought to offer our selues ūto god ass Paul exhorteth to the romans saing I pray yow that yow will giue vp or offer your bodies an holy liuing ād pleasing host vnto god which is your reasonable seruing of god This sacrifie is made bi deniēg of ourseluis besides that praisses thankesgeuing praiers allmes deedes and to be short all duties off Christiā deuociō be sacrifices And to proue that this is trowth Peter speketh not here to the prestis only but he speaketh to all the christen peple and to all the faithful whom he calleth a chosen peple a kingly presthode c. The prest than that saith the masse vsurpeth the office that belōgeth only to christ But we will speake of this yet more largily in the iiij part There foloweth further more in this part a praier that is to saie Vpon which things or els vpon which gifftes and speaketh of that host and that wine cōsecrated which affter their opiniō are the trewe body and the naturall blood of Christ Vpon ihe which things saith he vouchsaue to looke with an helpfull and a fauorable cowntenance and to accept them as thow didst vouchsaue to accept the gifftes of thy iust seruant Abel and the sacrifice of our patriark Abraham and that holy sacrifice vnspotted host that thy high prest Melchisedech did offer vnto the. Thei that haue made this praier and that which foloweth which is the ninth part either thei byleued not that Christ shuld be in the host or in that cupp and so be heretikes affter the opinion of defenders of the masse which hold as an artickle of our faith that Christ is really in the Sacrament or els if thei byleuid it thei haue spokē most folisshly and wickedly For in this praier is desiered that god wold accept the body and bloode of Iesus Christ as he accepted the gifftes and sacrifices of thes iij. that is to say of Abel Abraham and Melchisedeck which were plainly men ād not withowt sinne although iust by gods grace and had nede of the forgeuenes of sinnes Iff it be so thā as in dede it is how doth this praier desire of god that he wold accept the bodi and blood of Iesus Christ his son̄ as he accepted the sacrifices of thos 3. As though his own sonn were not more accepted but rather lesse accepted thā the sacrifices of thes 3. which were sacrifices of vnreasonable beastes ād of plain creatures And who dowteth the body and blood of christ is withowt measure more accepted thā as many sacrifices as euer were made in the world Yea who dowthet that all the sacrifices all the offerings all the seruices all the good workes of thes iij. fore named and of all other mē that euer pleased or were acceptable to god were accepted by Iesus christ by his body ād by his blood by the which god is pacified with vs who dowteth this but the infidel ād the wicked man And this praier desiereth that god wold so accept the blood of his son̄ redemer of the world as he did the blood of beastes Ah blasphemos praier Thes be thos great misteries that this canon hath which Williā Durant expowndeth with so great reuerēce But some man may parauenture say that there is not desiered in this praier absolutly that the body and the blood of Iesus Christ for themselues shuld be acceptable to god as the sacrifices of thos iij. holy men because there is no dowt but that thei be more acceptable for them selues thā all the sacrifices of all mē of the world But there is desiered that thei may be acceptable to god for vs and so is the praier to be vnderstond This answer semeth suttle and som contentios man might parauēture shew him selff stowt with it but it is nothing worth For let them say what thei will it shall be allwaies inconuenient ffor iff they wil desyre that the body and blood of Ihesus Christ for them selues shuld be acceptable to god as the sacrifices of simple men no man wil euer say that this shuld be conueniente And euen so shall it be inconuenyēt also to pray that the body and the blood off Ihesus Christ shuld be accepted for vs as the sacrifyces of thos iij weare Because it is very cōuenyent that thei shuld be moch more acceptable to god for vs than the sacrifices of thos iij. ffor because the body and blood of Ihesus Christ haue obteyned vs forgeuenes of sin̄es redemption grace and euerlasting liffe a thinge that thos sacrifyces could not doo to thos iij. that dyd them Thos sacrifyces were in dede fygures of Christ but they dyd not take a way sin̄es nor gaue not helth as S. Paul saith to the hebrews He. ◅ Here Williā Durant sayth in his ratyonall that this word sicut doth meane likelynes and not quantytye But this is nothing worth for iff we shuld offer ony gyfft that were a playne creature we might ask this But the sonn of god is offered who cānot but be more accepted to god withowt comparison than thos sacrifices This praier is fond and is as if for a gret prince that had infinite riches some frind of his wold desire and pray god that he wold make the same prince as rich as a priuate citizin Such a praier shuld be scorne worthy and folissh euen so is this And absolutely to him that well considereth the matter he that made this praier did not byleue that the body and blood of Christ shuld be really in that host ād cupp but beleued that there was thonly bread and wine euen as in baptime we haue no change of the water but the water remaineth water as before allthough it be a sacrament which it was not before Yet to be a sacrament doth not change the water as concerning the substance Euen so the bread and the wine in the sacrament remaine bread and wine still For iff he had thought that the body and blood of Christ had bene in the sacrament realli he wold neuer haue made that praier for it is to fond Iff Christes body and blood be there and he byleued it not it foloweth according to their opinion that this praier is heresy THE IIII. CHAPTER Here is examined the ix part of the canon which is most wicked it examineth also the x. part which is folissh ād speaketh against it selff And it examineth also the xi and last part of the same canon THe ix part of the canon is this praier On our kneis we besech the Allmighty god command that thes things that is to say that host and that which is in the cup may be caried by thy holy Angels handes to thyne high altare in to the sight of thy diuine maiestie to the intent that as many of vs as shall receiue of this partaking
not said with a lowd voice to signifie that christ sometime cried owt Mathei 27. as whā he cried on the crosse Heli Heli ād whā also preaching he cried if any be thirst let him come to me and drinck And the rationall a litle affter saith that be cause we be not worthy to deserue the forgiuenes of the things past present and to come except it be geuen vs by the praier of the blessed virgin Mary and of the blessed Peter ād Paul ād thother saintes therfor we do call them here to our help But I aske by whos intercession are sinnes forgeuen by Peters Paulis or the sainctes all which had their sin̄es Iff this praier intend that that the rationall saith it is blasphemos as though we deserue not pardon eycept by the blissed virgin and of the blessed Peter Paule Andrewe and other saintes And where is this sownd in the holy scripture that we deserue not forgiuenes of sinnes but by the praiers of saintes How doth this rationall knowe this How can we surely speake of the remission of sinnes iff not by the word of god The word of god thorowowtly saith that sinnes are forgeuen vs by christes intreating and that Iesus Christ is our meane aduocate and intreater and it appointeth no nother but him nor maketh no mention of ani other And this praier will haue that by saintes praiers sinnes are forgeuen vs. Why saith he not by Christis intercession Why do we than faine to our selues of our fansy other aduocates and other intreaters But let the rationall with his masse tell me a litle the forenamed saintes and all the rest by whos intercession deserued thei pardon hauing all had one sinn or others Sureli all had nede of pardon It is necessari iff thei will answer well that thei say bi Christ Iff it be soo why do thei allege other than him in the forgeuenes of sinnes What man so euer he be in the world for so moch as by one only way the sinnes of the world are forgeuen as S. Iohn saith in his 1. pistell that he is the propycyacion for our sinnes and not only for ours but for all thos of the world Whā this praier is done the host is broken ouer the cupp in 2. partes and one of thos partys is laid vpon the pa◅en and the other also is broken in 2. partes and the one of thes 2. second partis is laid also vpon the paten With the other that first was put there And affter holding in his hand that other of the 2. pecys also ouer the cupp he saith per omnia secula seculorum And Amen is answered And affter he addeth pax domini sit semper uo biscum And saing thes wordes there are made 3. crossis with that pece of the host ouer the cupp Whē the wordes be spoken and the crossis made the prest saith thes wordes that is to say Let the mixing and consecracion of the body of our lord Iesus Christ be vnto vs that do or shall receiue them vnto euerlastinge life And all thes things haue their significacions and their misteries that is to say their supersticions But why doo thei not handle the sacrament as Christ taught Christ did nat put any part of the breade in to the cupp but seuerally gaue it to his disciples first the bread which signified the body after the wine which signifyed the blood ech one a part by it selff And dyd not mingle them together as men are wōt to doo sometymes with comon breade that is eaten sopt in wyne This is not conuenyent in the holy sacramēt the which ought not to be hādeled otherwyse thā as Christ hath taught vs. Here the racyonall sayth that this mixture is made for iij. causes The first is to signifye that the body is not withowt the blood nor the blood withowt the body The second is to signifye that there is not but one sacrament The third is to declare the returne of the sowle to the body And what meaneth it that the Apostels and the prymatyue church the which kept the singlenes of the institucyon of the sacrament haue not added thes mynglings What is this but to handell the diuyne misteryes affter our owne fasshion yea rather to make a mock at them And euen as they them selues haue added why also may not we make other addicyon and gyue them their significacyōs and add eueri day to this masse euen tyll the day of iudgement and make it so long that thei shuld stand an hole yeare in saing it Than what meaneth this word cōsecracyon whan the prest sayth let this mixture and consecracyon of the body and blode of our lord Ihesus Christ be mades Is not the consecracyon made allredy and the bread turned in to the body and the wyne in to the blood as thei say what nedeth it more that it shuld be made agayne a newe iff it be made allready Except thei wold vnderstand and golfe affter this fasshō that is to say let the comixcyon of the body and the bloode that we make and the consecracyon allready made become to vs that shal take it the body and blood of Christ to the profite of euerlasting liffe But I can not tell if this were his mynd or no that ordeyned this part of the masse THE SECOND CHAPTER Of the Agnus Dei of the iiij prayers that goo before the receauyng of the sacrament and of ij that folow How gret a part of the last prayers in the masse be wicked and some of them speake against the pryuate masse THe agnus dei foloweth which is said iij. times Affter that are said iij. praiers the first destreth that god wold not looke vpon the sinnes of him that saith the masse and that he wold according to his will agree and make one the church The second destreth that by the most holy body and blood of Christ he wold deliuer him from iniquitie and from all his euels And praith that he may be brought nerer to the commandments of god and that he may neuer be sondered from him The third desireth that the sacrament shuld not become his iudgement and cōdemnacion but that it might be a defence of his sowle and body Whan thes iij praiers are said he taketh the host in his hand saing I will take the heuenly breade and wil call vp on the name of the lord and knocketh his brest iij. times saing also thrise Domine non sum dignus that is lord I ā vnworthie And affter he hath takē the host in his hād he saith the body of our lord Iesus Christ kepe my sowle to euerlasting life Amen And whan he hath said thus he receiueth the host And affter he taketh the cupp in his hand saing Quid retribuam Domino c. that is what shall I render to the lord And he saith thus The blood of our lord Iesus Christ kepe my sowle to euerlasting life and receiueth the cupp Thone and thother being receiued the prest affterwardes
the sacrament and not of the hole masse either thei meane of the breade and wine not yet consecrated or els affter that thei be cōsecrated Wich way so euer thei take it it is fals that thei shuld be a sacrifice for sin̄es Although I know that affter both sortis thei wold it shuld be a sacrifice both affter the consecration and before There is no dowt but affter the cōsecration folowing their opinion the bread and the wine be a sacrice For as thei think Christ all hole is there in body and in sowle and that there is no more neither bread nor wine but only Christ the which is the trew sacrifice Also that thei hold that that bread and wine is a sacrifice before the consecratiō how can thei denie it so many praiers secrets and chefely the canon affirming it The which canon in the first part praith god that he wold blesse that bread and wine and calleth them holy vntasted sacrifices in the plural nomber And in the second part that is to say in the memento he calleth them a sacrifice of praise The which is offered for the saluation of sowles And in the fourth part he calleth them an oblacyon And in the fifft he praith god that he wold vouchsafe taccept this oblacion so that it might becōe the body and blood of his best beloued sonn So that than they will that that breade and wine which are not yet cōsecrated shuld be a sacrifice for the ransoming of sowles And they pray that they may becom Christes body ād blood Iff they pray that they may become then be they not yet consecrated For whan they be cōsecrated they are become Christs body ād blood as they think and it nedeth not any more to pray that they shuld become soo becaus they be allready soo becomne That this bread and wine vncōsecrated shuld not be a sacrifice for sinnes it is an easy thing to proue For that according to tholy scripture the sacrifice for sinnes is that that hath redemed vs. For so moch as the redempcion is as moch to say as the forgeuenes of sinnes according to Paul as it is writton to the Ephesians and to the Colossians Eph. 1. Collos 1. But we be not redemed neyther with bread nor wyne but only with the blood of the vnspotted lamb christ as Peter saith in his first pistle 1. Petri 1 Yow knowe that yow were not redemed from yowr vayne conuersacion which yow toke by the tradicion of yowr elders with fadeable things as gold ād siluer but with Christes precios blood as of an hole and vndefyled lamb Is not the bread and wine vncōsecrated things fade able and corruptible How vile doth this masse make Christes redēpcion Of how litle valew his blessed blood God wold not pardon sin̄e but that there was paid so gret a price so gret a passiō so high a blood and so gret a death as that was of his sonn And they will that sinnes shuld be pardoned with bread and wine which yet are no nother but plaine breade ād plaine wine That the bread and the wine whā the consecraciō is made shuld be no sacrifice although there were no more neither bread nor wine but the body and blood of Christ Ihesus as they wold haue it I say that they be no sacrifice They be so moch lesse a sacrifice iff the bread ād the wine remaine And that they shuld be the sacrament as without dowt the Sacramēt is no nother in substās but bread and wyne consecrated that is to say appointed to the vse to which Christ appointed thē that is to sai to bring in to remembrans his body and blood That the sacrament I say is no sacrifice in what so euer sort it be a sacrament I proue it by Paul in his pistle to the hebrews Hebre. 7.8.9.10 The which if the fauorers of the masse had but supperficially vnderstand they wold neuer so boldly haue vttered that the masse or let it be the sacrament shuld be a sacrifice It is writton first in that pistle that there were in the lawe many prystes becaus thei were mortall but Christ who is immortall hath now theuerlasting pristhode and therfor can saue for euer all thos that goo to god by him alweys liuyng to that end that he may intreate god for vs. And he addeth a none affter that thos prestes or els bysshops had nede toffer sacryfyces not only for the sinnes of the peple but for their own also But it behoued that Christ shuld be vndefyled innocent the which shuld not haue nede eueri dai toffer for him selffe and affter for the peple because he dyd this ones whan he offred hym selffe For so moch as that the lawe appointeth men bisshops that haue weakenessys Psal 110. but the word of the oth that is to sai the word of god and of which Dauyd spake in the Psalme appointeth the son for euer consummate that is to say perfite By thes wordes ij things are geuen vs to be vnderstand First that none can offer a sacrifice that may auaile as before god for sinnes except Christ that is pure innocent separated from sinners perfite and euerlasting bishop who hath in such sort offered him selff that the sacrifice is the prest him selff and the priest the sacrifice it selff For that toffer sacrifice for sinnes it behoueth not only that the sacrifice shuld be cleane pure and withowt spott but it is necessary that he that offereth it shuld be him selff also cleane and that he shuld not haue nede toffer for his own sinnes It is knowen off old that among men also whan a thing is presented by the handes of one that is in displeasure of any gret lord allthough that the thing be good yet it shall not be acceptable because that he which presenteth it is not fauored Iff it be so than that he who offereth must be cleane and no sinner the prestes that say masse can not offer sacrifice for sinnes because thei be vncleane and sinners And albeit thei shuld in deede offer Christ ones again that offring could not auaile for sinnes because it is nedefull for the bringing to passe of such an effect that both th one and thother shuld be cleane and withowt spott not only the sacrfice but also the sacrificer a thing that can not be among as many as be but men in the whole world And for this cause it behoued that Christ him selff shuld be he that shuld offer and make sacrifice to god and no nother but him selff because he alone is without sinne and all the rest be sinners Than it geuyth also tunderstand that it nedeth not any more to doo sacrifice for sinnes becaus he that hath done sacrifice Christ hath satisfied hauing done ones for euer because it was perfite being the same Christ theuerlasting bisshop that offred him selff Iff that haue suffised being ones done what nedeth it to make other sacrifices or to make againe the same at other times Surely
is clere that it was not made by one man nor at ones but at diuers times And the order of the times is moch lesse kept that is to say that that which the more awnciēt haue appointed shuld be now first in the canon but it is cleane contrary For Alexāder the .1 was before all thē ād yet the qui pridie quam pateretur which Alexāder him selff appointed is put in the vi place And the te igitur the which as thei say gelasius made who folowed Alexāder a lōg time goth before all thother partis of the canō Gregory as the ratiōall of diuine offices affirmeth added the preface before the pater noster that is to say the Oremus praeceptis salutaribus mōiti ād also that the pater noster shuld be said as he affirmeth in the register saing that it shuld be an vnfit thing that the praier of scolasticus of which we haue made mentiō before that is to say the canō shuld be said and christes praier that is to say the pater noster shuld be vnsaid Sergius the pope did first appoint that the Agnus dei shuld be thrise sōg ouer And to be short affter their own Iudgement Christ hath instituted of this masse nothing except the sacramēt All the rest was added by diuers mē ād at diuers times Looke vpon platina in the life of sixtus the 1. bishop of rome And the ratiōall of diuine offices in the fourth booke ād polidorus Virgilius of vrbine in the .x. chapter of the .1 booke de inuētorbus rerū all the which say that christ did say no part of this masse except the words of the cōsecration But it is worthy of noting that the defenders of the masse sai that the masse is gods institution for the sacrament is the chefe of the same masse and that it is trewe that the masse was augmēted ād increased bi diuers mē and at diuers times yet for all that thei sai that the masse for becaus of the chefe part is gods institution And thos additions be for furnisshing of it neuertheles the substance which is the sacramēt was made bi christ And it semith to me that thei wold sai of the masse as of a great riuer As for example of the poo the which at the head The poo is a great Riuer in Italie as Thamis is in England where it beginneth is very lytle and is no better than a lytle spring but becaus there comyth in to it many other ryuers therfor it becomyth affterward great neuerthelesse it kepith the name of Poo So is it of the masse But this talk is nothing worth Our questyon is not now of the name that all that gathering is called masse and the same sacrament shuld be also called Masse as it is called Poo not only the spring where it beginnyth but all thos ryuers gathered to gether in one great ryuer which affter is all to gether called Poo We speake here of the whole masse and we say that all the masse that is to say all that myxture of wordes ād of so mani ceremonyes was not instituted by Christ but by many Popys and that Christ made no more of the whole masse but the sacrament only And seing that we haue putt the similitude of the masse and of the Poo we will say that allthough that all that composition or gathering to gether of ryuers in to one great riuer shuld be called Poo not withstanding we shall neuer sai that all that gret and large ryuer shuld growe owt of that litle spring but we will say that it groweth of diuers ryuers that is to say the gret Poo And that all the Poo doth not growe of the lytle spring but only a lytle part of it So all the masse came not from Christ but only that lytle part of the consecracion Yea according to their own opiniō the rest was added by plaine men It is playne that taking also this word Masse for the sacrament that thei make it was neuer ordeyned by Christ nor vsed by his apostles For the sacramēt that Christ ordeined and the Apostles vsed was of a nother sort moch differing and diuers from theirs First the consecracion was made after a nother sort Becaus Christ said the words of the consecracion a lowd and dyd pronownce them plainely that all vnderstode Thei say them sofftly that none heareth them but he that saith the masse And how can it be a sacrament to them that vnderstond not nor heare not the wordes seing a thing can not be a sacrament except the wordes be hard and vnderstand Furthermore Christ said not thos wordes with mind to change the substance of the breade and wine in to his body and blood as thei think but to appoint th one and thother to be signes in his rememberans as his wordes doo shewe So that seing thei haue not the same meaning that Christ had nor will not doo the same that Christ did but a nother thing we must nedes say that such a sacrament is not Christes sacrament but a thing fownd owt by them selues made affter their own maner and not according to Christes institution Furthermore the sacrament which Christ did institute was instituted to th entent that it shuld be a spirituall supper delt to many and he gaue it to all Thei doo it not affter this sort but the prest only taketh that his sacrament and giueth it not to other nor this thing is no communion becaus a communion is whan many doo partake of one thing and not whan one alone vseth it So that seing thei doo not as Christ did or rather as he commanded that it shuld be done their is no trewe sacramēt as also we haue proued in the second chapter of this part Nor it was not instituted by Christ but by mans inuencion Let them than vnderstand this their masse either for all the hole gathering frō the Introibo to the Ite missa est or els for the sacrament only becaus it is no trewe sacrament I say that it is not gods ordinance but mans And being mans ordinans yet thei make it a sacrifice and a woshipping of god against his expresse commandment who will not be honored with the inuention of men as allredy we haue so offten sayd There remaineth now to see from whens this name of Masse had the beginning Certen say as Master William Durant in the proheme of the iiij part of his reason geuing of gods seruice that this Name Masse is some time a nowne collectiue some time a nowne proper A Nowne collectiue is à word that gatherith many into one A Nowne proper speakith but of one only whā it is a collectiue that is to say whan it importeth all the whole gathering from the entring to the end that is to say Ite missa est he saith that it is as moch to say as sent or committed ouer Becaus the faithfull peple by the mistery of the priest the which doth Christes
office betwene god and men doth send their praiers and supplications to god Some time this name masse is a nowne proper and doth signifie Christ first sent from the father to vs and sent from vs to the father to th entent that before him he might intreate for vs Albeit for shortnes I doo not recite all his opinion Some other as Ihon rewcklin a man very well lerned in the hebrew tōg saith that the masse is no greke name nor latin but hebrewe ād is as moch to sai as sacrifice And now our massemongers wold that the masse shuld be a sacrifice for sinnes Othersome say as Polidor virgil of vrbine that Missa is as moch to say as geuing leaue to depart or licensing the peple that thei may goo their way that is to say-that licence and leaue is geuē them that thei may depart for so moch as in old time no man ought to depart from the holy things thei being present except licens were geuen them And Missa is as moch to say as missio or dimissio a licensing or geuing leaue to depart becaus that being ended the peple is licensed to goo at their plesure to their howses He saith besides many things vp on this matter but becaus I know that this name hath an abhominable signification I litle desire to serch any further for the beginning of so vngracios a name Whan it shuld haue begon to be so named and who shuld haue fownd it owt it is not well knowne It appearith that from pope gregories time the first hetherto it hath bene vsed And I doo not remember that I euer redd that before his time it was vsed THE IIII. CHAPTER That the mass is a gathering together and an heape yea a sea of abuses wikednessis and superstitions IT is not our purpos nor mind to tell all the abuses of the masse becaus we knowe them not all And allthough we knewe them thei be so many that to goo abowt to write them all thei wold make to gret a booke It shall suffise we write some of thē by the which may be sufficientli Iudged what maner a thing this masse is One of the chefe is the worshipping the host and the cupp the which is an Idolatry For frō whens gather thei that the sacramēts ought to be worshipped The sacramentis ought to be handeled with reuerens as holy things and godlie institutions but that thei ought to be worshipped we haue it not in any place of the scripture nor by any example of the apostels or of the saintes of the old church euē as the baptime is not worshipped but is a signe that maketh vs sure ād certen that our sinnis be forgeuin vs by Christ so neither the bread or let it be the host nor the cupp ought to be worshipped nor christ did not institute them to this end But be did institute them in remembrans of his body and blood geuin for forgiuenes of our sinnes This remembrans the bread and the wine allredy work withowt that that thei shuld be worshipped And it is to be noted that iff thei shuld be worshipped the apostles whan Christ did institute the sacrament of his body and blood thei wold haue worshipded it but thei did not worship it so farr as we haue by the story of the euangelistes yea thei sate still at the table And it well appearith by a certen text of Honorius the pope in the iij. booke of the decretalls in the title de celebratione missarum that this worshipping is no old but a newe thing And it semith that it shuld be the institucion of honorius himselff who died in the yeare of our lord 1226. His wordes in the said decretall be thes To th entent that thorow the small care of the pristes gods anger shuld not be more greuosly sent we doo straitely command that the sacrament of thanksgeuing be by the prestes placed in a singular place cleane and locked and kept deuowtly and faithfully But let the prest very offten teach his peple that whan the helthfull host is liffted vp on high in the celebracion of the masse thei reuerently bowe them seluis doing the same whā the priest beareth it to the sicke Here honorius cōmādeth that the peple shuld bowe thē seluis to the host ād doth not say than expressely that thei ought to worship it he saith only that thei ought to bowe thē seluis And he geueth vs to vnderstand by this his talk either that he him selff was the institutor of that thing or els that this bowing to the sacramēt began not long affter him For iff the vse had bene old it had not neded to make so straight a cōmādmēt to kepe it for thos things that the custō ād vse is to doo are done withowt cōmādmēt And whithowt dowt the sāe hōorius iff such a custōe had bēe before him he wold haue alledged either which had bēe the begin̄er or at the least the custō it selff And he of him selff wold not so haue spokē as he hath done The defenders of tbe masse will say that christ may be and ought to be worshipped where he is he is in that host wherfor he ought to be worshipped in the same I āswer that worshipping is a deede of faith faith is not but by the same word of god Let them shewe one Iote if thei cā doo it by gods word that Christ shuld be in the sacrament bodily We doo worship Christ in heauen becaus we haue the scripture clere that he is ascended in to heauen and there abideth and sitteth on the right hand of god Luke 24. Mark 16. Act. 13. Ephes 4. Act 3. as it is writton in luke and mark in thactis of thapostles ād to thephesians Who doth asserten vs that Christ is in that host and in that cupp First we be not certen that the prest hath consecrated hauing not perceiued the wordes Furthermore he may haue said the wordes ād yet the consecracion shall not be made becaus that either he shal not haue had th entent or the trewe faith which things the consecracion requireth as the master of the sentencis saith I speake now affter their opinion But of this thing we will speake more at large in the sermon of the sacrament Now I will not stand to dispute becaus I shuld be to long That may be said to them that worship Christ in the host and in the cupp that Christ said to the samaritane yow worship that that yow know not Furthermore as we haue said before and also wil say there hath bene no one or very fewe trew priestes from many an hundreth yeare hetherto becaus thos that haue ordeined them were not trewe bisshops so than thei did neuer consecrate Here there might be said many things but for shortnes I will leaue them Another abuse is that the wordes of the consecraciō be not said with a lowd voice as thei ought to be seing thei be wordes of the holy gospell
glasse was lightly broken For this cause it was ordeined that thei shuld minister in siluer or in gold And iff thei could not be gotten at the least in tinne and not in any other metall becaus of the euill sauor of the other metalls Some say that pope Vrbanus the first did institute this And what meaneth it that the Apostles nor the primatiue church did not vse so gret pomp in vessels what superstitions be these How moch were to be said here But it suffiseth me to toch the abuses becaus thei wold axe to many wordes to declare them at length Also thei geue to vnderstand that that day that a man heareth masse there can no misfortutune chance vnto him And yet we doo see many haue euel lucke that day that thei haue hard the masse and die an euill death Pope victor the iij. died of poison by the cōsecrated wine that was poisoned Henry the seuinth Emperor of rome died by the ost that was poisoned and geuen vnto him by a dominicane frire in the castle bonconuento the yere of our lord 1086. A nother is that albeit the masse is mans inuencion as we haue prouid yet thei command it as though it were gods commandment This is against the expresse word of god him selff Who saith in Deutronomy doo to the lord only that that I command the Deut. 12. and thow shalt not add nor minissh And against the saing of Esay Esay 29. which offten times we haue alleged that is to say that god will not be honored with men̄s commandemēts Matth. 15. And Christ in S. Matthew saith the same alledging the Prophet A nother is that thei affirme that he who saith the masse hath greter auctoritie than the angels and also than the blessed virgin And this is becaus thei hold that in the masse is made the transsubstancion of the breade and the wine in to Christes body and blood And bileuing that Christ him selff is present bodily in the host and in the cupp the which things neither the angels nor the blessed virgin haue auctoritie to doo but the prestes only thei conclude that thos prestes haue gretter auctoritie than the angels or the blessed virgin And thei say that the same most blessed mother caused Christ to come in to hir virginlike wombe with 8. wordes that is to say Ecce ancilla domini fiat mihi secundum uerbum tuum And the pristes make him to come in to the host with v. wordes only that is to say Hoc est enim corpus meum I will leaue at this time to examen this their fals spech that the blessed mother shuld make the sonn of god to come with thos wordes as though thei shuld haue had vertew to make him take flessh that being only of gods work I will leaue as I say to speake of this and I will axe them from whens it commith that on th one part thei so moch exalt the blessed virgin that thei abase Christ and god for thei call hir quene of heauen starr of the sea our hope our life mother of mercy And thei geue hir such titles and honor as be only due to god and Christ. And here thei make hir meaner than a plaine prest sometimes as I haue said very wicked Indede I confesse that the ministery of gods word and of the sacraments is not committed to the blessed mother nor to the angels but to men Yet for this caus to goo abowt to make men that bee sinners more worthy than the angels that be withowt sinne or than the mother of god it is vnfit chefly for that the prestes be not trewe ministers of the sacraments for so moch as he that doth not minister the word ought neither to minister the sacraments Further also as we haue said before thei be not called by a trewe vocacion the which is necessary to the ministery A nother abuse is that the corporasses the challises ād the ostis may not be touched by lay mē This thei haue done to make men haue the more reuerens and deuocion to the masse This office of toching the chalises the host the patēts and the corporasses thei say belongeth only to them that be in sacris that is in holy orders and not to other But for what caus may not a thing be toched with the hand iff it be cleane and nett the which may be eaten and dronken But this sacrament is eaten that is to say the host and is dronkē that is to say the wine for what caus thā may it not be touched with the hand seing it is touched with the mowth This supersticion is against Christes ordinans and the custom of the Apostles For Christ whan he reached the bread and the cupp to his Apostlos he said vnto them that thei shuld take and thei toke th one and thother with their handes and surely thei touched them Christ did not than giue it them in their mowthes Shall we say that Christ shuld speake thes wordes that is to say Take yow Eate yow Drink yow only for the Apostles and not for other This is not soo but he spake them for all thos that weare to receiue the sacrament as also S. Paul geuith to vnderstand the which writing to the Corinthes in his first reciteth Christes wordes and teacheth not only the ministers but all the whole church what thei haue to doo Seing than this things is comon to all Christians and not belonging to pristes only why may thei not than be touched by lay men seing thei also ought to communicate and receiue the same sacramēt The old church and the Apostles deliuered the sacrament in to the handes of all them that did receiue it From whens is this newe religion come contrary to Christes Institution and to the Apostles custom Shall it be conuenient that a lay man who with a good and a clere consciens receiuith the sacrament may not touche it And a wicked prest with a blotted and a defiled consciens shall be Counted worthy to handle it A nother abuse is that the masse is said in the honor of sainctes and sainctesses This ought not to be done for so moch as that the sacrament which is the substans of the masse was instituted in rememberans of Christ who only is dead for our ransoming And it was not instituted in the honor of saintes Why than is not the masse said in rememberans of Christ and not of saintes among which no one hath redemed vs nor the sacrament was not instituted for none of them but only in Christes remembrās Christ saith doo this in my remembrans And thei will doo it in remēbrans of saintes Shuld it not be a gret abuse if the gospell shuld be preached in the honor of saints the which is Christes only Euē so is it of the sacramēt Thei handle their masses as poore ignorant men doo their praiers which will say Aue Maria in thonor of S. Christopher and the pater noster in worship of
Now let vs see iff thes most greuos sinnes be fownd among the Christian peple I call them Christian becaus thei be so named or no. I wold to God there were fownd none How moch vnbilefe how many blasphemies how many Idolatries haue we Tell me is it any vnbilefe ād Idolatry to worship verie mē And what shall we speake of verie mē Is it Idolatry to worship their bonys their ashes their garments ther hattys their girdles And what more to worship that which is not knowen Sometime the bonys off some wicked parson I will not say of other beastys which thing may easily happen in the place of saintes reliques Thei doo also worshipp in diuers places diuers bodies as though thei were the bodies of one selff saint and the simple peple byleueth that both th one and thother of thos bodies be the bodies of that saint as though one man shuld haue had 2. bodies I doo remember that I haue sene in the citie off Arle a certen body the which thei say is S. Antonis the abbot and yet not withstonding there is shewed a nother in the citie of Vienna In Dolpheny the which neuerteles thei say and affirme is S. Antonyes The body off S. Williā of aquitan the Seneases say that it is in an abbey in their territory and thei shewe it And yet a nother body is shewed in a certen vale called S. Iames vale vnder the rule of grisones and there is done to it gret reuerens It is worshipped thei ronn to it for raine for faire wether and other busines How many heades of S. Iohan Baptist be shewed in diuers placis And what scornes be thes of the Christen religion What madnesses what dulnesses be thes that men shuld loose the comon sense and shuld haue lesse Iudgement than the brute beastes So we could iff we wold tell yow a gret nombrer of like abuses This corrupcion can not be scused for it is to plaine Let vs goo on further Is it Idolatry to worship the Imagis to knele before them to stick candels before them to sett lampes there to call vp on them to make vowes to them to hang torches tapers cloth corne garments eyes handes heades leggs sometime off waxe somtime off siluer before them to hang before them Imagis off men off wemen of yong childern off oxen and off hors Is it Idolatry and likewise I ought to saye plaine doltisshnes to haue greter deuociō to one Image or picture than to a nother off the selff same saint or saintes As for example more to that off S. Loreto than to that off the Annunciation in Florence and to think that the one shuld doo more miracles than the other Is it Idolatry to make the Image of the Trinitie the which is an high spirite that can not be painted nor carued by any maner off meanes And yet against Gods commandement thei paint it and carue it in the shape of certen strange monsters that is to say somtimes in the shape of a man with 3. heades somtimes in the fasshon of 3. men with 2. leggs only and in this forme thei worship it and make their vowes to it What will thei say here will thei defend thes manifest abuses with that their distinction that thei make off Dulia and Hiperdulia and Latria This thing meaneth a nother maner of thing than Dulia and Hiperdulia I will not declare thes wordes and their distinction the which I knowe well ynough frō whēs it cometh Iff there were not worldy gaine here in this Idolatry their Images and heir Dulias and Hiperdulias wold soone cease It can not be denied but among the Christen peple there be many Idolatries moch vnbilefe many blasphemies and sacrilegis Sacrilege is to robb the holy things What is more holy than Gods and Christes honor This is to cleere Neuertheles among all the rest as there be many Idolatries I will not say withowt nomber that of the masse is the gretest and the chefe not only becaus the host and the cup be worshipped in stead of Christ not being certen that the same Christ is there as before in the Cannon we haue proued in that part where their consecracion is spoken off and as also we will better proue in the sermon in th end of this booke but moch more becaus thei will that all the Masse shuld be a worship of God saing that it is a sacrifice for the sinnes of the liuing and of the dead in the which God is honored yea Christ him selff is offered to God wherfor it doth well folow that it is a most gret Idolatry for so moch as that Idolatry is not only where any visible ydoll or ymage is honored but euery worship the which is made vnto God withowt his word is Idolatry for becaus that no such worship is trewe worship nor pleasith God but rather it is to him abhominacion for so moch then as that God will not as before we haue allredy offten told that we shuld honor him affter our own mind and as it semeth good to vs but will that we shuld honor him as he doth teach and command vs Esa 29. Math. 15. as we haue in Esay and Christ alleageth him selff in sanct Mathew We haue before allredy proued that the Masse is mans inuencion therfor seing we will make it a worship as we doo yea the chefe of the Christian religion we must conclude that it is an Idolatry becaus that it is a worship withowt Gods word But let vs see off what sort off Idolatry it is First there be many deceites and amōg the rest there is this that thei persuade the peple as an article off their faith not only that Christ is bodily in that host and likewise in the cupp and make them honor the one and thother but that he is there as gret and as thick as he was vp on the wood off the crosse and that he is wholly not only in that litle host but in euery part off the host and the wine and that he is in heauen and in earth and in all places where the hostes be consecrated And thei persuade that there is the whole court off heauen and that there is no more bread nor wine but only the withcōmes off th one and off the other For their substancis thei be transsubstanciated that is to say changed in to the substance off the body and blood off Christ. All the which things and many other thei haue fownd owt to geue the more credite to this their masse to th entent that the peple shuld haue more deuocion to it Thei haue fownd that it is good for euery thing and that it hath vertews innumerable and thei haue geuen vs to vnderstand so many other things off this Masse that it is a wonder Further more as we haue proued in the former discorse that we haue made frō the Introibo to the end how many falsedes how many supersticions wickednesses and blasphemies be in this Masse There Christ
and liue for euer to whom be all rule honor and glory for euer and euer So be it THE END A SERMON OF THE SACRAMENT OF THANckes geuing the which declareth whether Christ be really and bodily in the same or no. I CAN NOT SAY HOW moch mirth and yoie is in my hart whan I see in this our age that there is kindeled in the mindes of many the holy desire to vnderstand gods things that is to say the inestimable and the incomprehensible treasures hidden in Christ Iesus whose knowlege passeth euery other knowlege and wisdoÌ„ and doth so farr excell Philip. 3. that Paul thapostel thought euery other thing losse and worthy the throwing awai in comparison of that Neuertheles the lord doth not geue this desire to know Christ to all men but to his own that is to say to the elect only the which he hath before the beginning of the world forepointed that thei shuld be to his praise and glory Ephes 1. Of the other side not with standing I can not but be sory seing in thes same times whan the gospell that hath bene hidden so many worlds past is by the goodnes of god lately come furth to light that there shuld be so mani and so diuers opinions of thes things that god hath Instituted to kepe agrement and peace among the faithful that is to say of the sacraments of the church in such sort as Sathan the enemy goth abowt with the self same instruments of peace and vnitie to make warr against Christ setting dissension making schismes and sowing debates amongst Christians not only among the people and comon sort but among thos that shuld be lightes glasses and examples of agrement to whom belongeth to teach other that is to say among the ministers and preachers of the holy gospell But this dere brethern ought not to offend yow nor to remoue yow from your holy purpos that yow haue in Christ but rather to confirm yow in faith and to kindle yow to make a gretter entry in to the religion and way of God for so moch as that god doth suffer such striffes and diuersities of opinioÌ„s for the benifite of his church and of the trewe bileuers First to th entent that his 1. Corinh 11 who abide constant and stowt may be manifest whan thother that haue not a trewe growndwork but a fained and vaine faith doo falle and faile Furthermore also to th entent that whan we see such disorders we shuld not put our trust in men the which may all err but we shuld come to gods word the which onlie can not deceiue and that we shuld indeuor our selues with all diligens and care to vnderstand it and that we our selues shuld looke in the scripture whether it be so or 〈◊〉 as we may reade of thos that hard Paul preacâ—â—â—…n the citie of Berrhoe in Macedony as it is writteÌ„ in in thactis of thapostels Act. 17. the which whan thei hard Paules sermon thei looked in the scripture itself whether it was so as he said 〈◊〉 â—…o And to be short to th enteÌ„t that we shuld prai vnto god that he wold geue vs the trewe vnderstanding of the same because the matters of gods spirite be not vnderstand by any mans way but by gods disclosing 2. Pet. 1. 1. Cho. 2. Now to return to the purpose of the striffe that is of the sacraments Some say that in the sacrameÌ„t of the body and blood of Christ that is to say in the breade and wyne consecrated in remembrans of his death is conteined his very body and his very blood and that there we haue really and bodily all and hole Christ as great and as thick as he was on the crosse Other some say that he is not there but there is only the breade and the wine as signes of Christes body and blood geuen for our redempcion And this controuersy and striffe is in such sort gone forward that it hath with many hindered the course of the holy gospel And it hath made that Christes enemies haue taken occasion and boldnes to blaspheme the holy lerning and gods truth But be it as it will allthough some haue coÌ„mitted a great fawt in this thing striuing euer bitterly against the contrary opinion wherby thei haue shewed them selues to be men and haue in som part spotted their own glory lessening the credite and auctoritie that the world had of them We not withstanding will comfort our seluis with Paules saing which he speaketh to the romaÌ„s Rom. 8. that to gods elect euery thing groweth to good And although that presently thorow such dissensyon we see among many nothing but disorder offence and euel yea hatred toward the gospell yet god for all that who knoweth how to get order owt of disorder and good owt of euell will caus whan it shall please him some great profite to growe owt of it in his church for the present vnknowen but in the end open thus we schuld beleue And becaus I know that many desire to vnderstand what shuld be the trewe opinion of this sacrament I for the loue of the truth for the glory of god and to doo them a pleasure and also a benifite will simply and with as moch easines as is possible sett furth the opinion which I thinck and hold for certeÌ„ hath bene and is the opinion of the Apostles all the awncienty of the holy scripture and of Christ him selff And let no man meruell though I setting the suttletyes a syde shall rather procede with simplenes and familiaritie and also though I shall reherse one thing often for so moch as that my mind is to be plainely vnderstand of all men and chefely of the simple aÌ„d vnlerned And because the thing is of so great waight that it deserueth to be handled with all diligens to th entent that all men may the more easily vnderstand it we by order and by parts will consider it And First we wil see how that there hath bene aÌ„d yet be diuers opinions of this sacrameÌ„t of the supper of the lord aÌ„d the cause why aÌ„d we will bring furth the contrary talkes and reasons to the truth Secondarily whan we haue shewed the trewe and catholike opinioÌ„ we will proue it with sure grownd workes and plaine reasons In the third place we will make it certenly appeare that this is the opinion of the holy fathers and of the old church In the fourth we will answer to the contrary saings and reasons shewing them to be vaine and of no waight In the fift and last we will serch owt from whens the error of the fals Imaginacions in the matter of that sacrament is proceded let vs than in the name of our lord begin We must vnderstand that the cause of the differens in this matter that is to say that some say that Christ is really and bodyly in the sacrament of the bread and the wyne and some other say the contrary that is to
say that he is not there is the euel vnderstanding of Christes own wordes the which he spake whā he instituted the same sacrament For one opinyon vnderstandeth them after one sort and thother after a nother so that the controuersy ād contraryetye of the opinyons is because they vnderstand not Christes wordes as they ought to be vnderstand Matth. 26. Marci 14. Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Whan Christ dyd institute this sacrament he toke first the breade and called it his body saing this is my body ▪ After he toke the wine ād called it his bloode They of the first opinyō say that seing the wordes be christes in dede they cā not be fals seing he hath playnely sayd this is my body shewing the breade ād this is my bloode shewing the wyne We must nedes say that christes body ād blood be there for els his wordes should not be trewe but fals which cā not be for somoch as that Christ being the chefe trouth can not say an vntrouth He hathe sayd that the breade is his body ād the wyne is his bloode ther for it must nedes be soo And in this opinyon there be also ij diuers myndes One sayth that Iesus Christ is not only in the sacrament but wil that neyther breade nor wyne shuld remayne in the sacramēt but that both of thē should be chāged and should be cownted turnkynded that is to say transsubstātiated as they call it the which meaneth turned in to Christes body ād blood The bread in to Chrystes trew ād natural body the wyne in to his blood And thei call this turnīg or chāging trāssubstātiacyō that is to say turning of the substances in such sort as there remayneth nothing of the bread ād the wyne but the withcommes or accydētes that is to say the whytenes of the breade the rowndnes the tast the sauor And so of the wyne there remayneth the rednes if it be redd the swetenes or the sharpnes according as the tast is and so of the other withcommes the which remayne withowt any subiect that is withowt any body to be in But the substances of th one ād thother be turned in to the substāces of christes body ād blood ād this is done by myracle becaus god can doo all things And this is the opinion of the prystes and fryres of the romish church And they haue in such sort preached it that the worlde in tyme past from certen hondreth yeares hetherto haue beleued it ād cownted it as an article of the faith And woo to hym that had sayd the contrary For they wold haue cōdemned ād burnt him as an heretik And that because the pope who was taken for god on earth for Christes lefetenant and had auctoritie to make men beleue what so euer liked hym and euery man was brought to his determinacion wold nedes haue it so Certen other of the first opinion too the which holdeth that Christ is realli and bodily in the Sacrament doo saie that not witstanding that Christes body is wholly in the breade and his blood wholli in the wine yet the breade and the wine abide in their substance as before and be not turned nor changed in to a nother thing as the former opinion saith And thes maner of mē must nedes saie that at the least .iij. very great miracles must come to passe in this Sacrament The first is that Christ is wholli under that breade ād under that wine as great ād as thick as he was on the crosse and as presentli as he is in heauen This is a gret thing that a great body continewyng great shuld be inclosed in a litle thing moch lesse then the same bodi The second miracle is that Christes whole bodi and his wholle blood is in the whole bread and in the whole wine and in eueri yea the least part of th one and the other as it is said of our reasonable sowle that it is whole in the whole bodi and whole in euery part of the body in such sort as if there shuld be made x. thowsand partes of the breade ād the wine whole Christ ād his whole blood shuld be in eueri of thos diuided partes which is yea a greater thing withowt cōparison thā that of the being of the sowle in the whole bodi ād in eueri part of the bodi For allthough the sowle be in eueri part of the bodi whilest that the partes abide yoined together yet it is not in all the partes of the bodi whan thei be separated For whan one part is diuided from the body the sowle is no more in the same But Christes bodi and blood according to this opinion be in all the partis of the bread ād of the wine whan thei be yoined to gether and whan thei be diuided or sondred The third miracle is that the same body and the same blood is in heauen and in earth both at a time and is in all places of the world where the sacrament is In France in Spayne in England in Almainy in Flanders in Italy in the east in the west in this in that citie In this in that church on this The tabernacle is a litle-closet wherein the sacrament is kept nere the altare on that Altare In this in that tabernale as thei say Yea and that thei say that Christ is euery where and filleth euery thing But it is behouefull for them that put or will haue the changing of the substances of the bread and the wine that is to say that their transsubstantion to put besides thes .iij. miracles others also and to make a better marcket of miracles than thei that put it not yea a better market than the holy scripture and god maketh to whom notwithstonding belongeth to make miracles who is not so liberall of mirakels as thei be The chefe grownd worck of this first opinion is that Christ said This is my bodi shewing the breade ād This is my blood shewing the wine And therfor Christ must be in the same sacramēt For els he shuld haue spokē falsely the which cā not be Thei bring furth in dede other reasōs but thei all doo litle auaile as that same that if Christ were not in the sacrament it shuld not haue bene so gret a fawt to him that had receiued it vnworthely as Paul saith that is to say who euer eateth that breade and drinketh that wine unworthyle he eateth and drinketh Iudgement that is to say cōdemnation If Christ were not there say they it shuld not be condemnation to eate that breade and to drink that wine But the condemnacion is to him that eateth and drinketh vnworthily Therfor Iesus Christes very body and blood is there And the same Paul in the self same chapter doth call the consecrated bread the lords body and therfor they say that Christ is in that breade and in that wine Thei of this opinion to my Iudgemēt doo make no other reasons that be any thing worth Not withstanding whan
we shall haue placed the trewe opinion we will answer to this shewsom reason and with the help of the lord we will make it appeare that it is triffling and of no valewe The other opinion and mind abowt this matter is that Christes body and blood be really in heauen where he sitteth on the right hand of god the father and that thei be not really and bodily in the sacrament but saith that the bread and the wine be signes appointed to signifie the body and the blood how Christ Iesus hath geuen both th one and thother for our ransom and satisfaction for our sinnes to th entent that we shuld kepe in our rememberans so great a thing and mistery as he him self whan he did institute the same sacrament in the presence of thapostles sayd Matth. 26. Marc. 14. Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. that is to say as oft as yow shall doo this yow shall doo it in my rememberās And this is the trew and catholik opinion a greable with the holy scripture and with the doctrine of the old church and awncient teachers the which haue not said as any one of the for said opinions saith that is to say that Christes body and blood be inclosed in that breade and wine ād moch lesse as thother opinion sayth the which affirmeth that the substances of the breade and wine be turned in to Christes body and blood and that there is no more neyther breade nor wine but only the withcommes of th one and thother but haue sayd that the breade and the wine remaine ād be signes of the body ād of the bloode for to bring to our remēbrans the most great ād high benefite that Christ hath wrought vs dieng for vs that is to say of our redempciō And the growndworkes of this opinion be sure and of such sort stedfast that all the Ingines in the world be not sufficient to throwe them to the grownd because thei be grownd wrought vp on the sure rock that is to say thei agree with gods trowth ād his word that abideth for euer We doo not Intend now here to bring furth all the reasons and grownd workes with the which this opinion is proued For we shuld than make a long treatyse and not a sermon to informe the ignorante and Iōglings in the knowlege of gods things as we intend to doo But we will only bring furth some fewe persuasions by the which it may be clerely knowen that it is euen soo as we sayd First this opinion saith The first reason that the definicion of the sacrament must nedes shewe and make Plaine to vs that the matter standeth thus that is to say that the breade and the wine remayne and that Christes body and blood is not really there in them For the definicion of a sacrament receiued of all men and is sent Augustines a catholike doctor is this that is to say that a sacrament is a signe of a holy thing Euery man confesseth that the thankes geuing is a sacrament If it be a sacrament it is no nother but a signe of an holy thing If it be a signe of an holy thing it nedeth not that the breade and the wine for to be signes shuld be changed in to other substances for so moch as that the signes that thei may be signes do not change any substans but only take a newe significacion And it is moch lesse nedefull that Christes body and blood shuld be really and bodily present in the same breade and wine for so moch as it is not necessary that the things signified and represented by the signes shuld be inclosed or present in the same signes as by experiens we may see in many sortes of signes that it is not nedefull that the thing signified shuld be either present or inclosed in the signe It is ynough that it be represented Let vs geue an exāple The Emperours Image is a signe of the Emperor And because it is no nother but a signe we will neuer say that the Emperor him self is in that Image nor that that Image is changed in to the emperors parson For if he were present where his Image is he neded not to sett vp the ymage for so moch as the Image is therfor sett vp speaking of the bodied things in any place because the thing signified is not there present and therfor it is sett vp to th entent that it may represent it So will we say of the breade and of the wyne that Christ hath Instituted them to th entent that thei might be representers of his body and blood to th entent that whan we see them and vse them for a sacrament as he hath ordeined we shuld remember that Christ hath geuen them that is to say his body and blood for our ransoming And for to be signes affter this sort it nedeth not that the body and blood shuld be there bodily present and moch lesse that thei shuld be changed in to other substances It suffiseth as we haue said that thei be signes as we haue spoken of the signes of the emperours ymage The reason standeth in this that the thāks geuing or for to vse paules wordes the lordes supper is no nother but a sacrament therfor it is no nother but a signe Because by the definiciō allredy geuen A sacrament is a signe of an holy thing The signe of a thing is not the thing it self nor is not changed in to it but only doth signifie it Therfor the breade and the wyne be not changed in to Christes body and blood nor they be not inclosed in them that is to say in the bread and the wyne And it suffiseth that thei be truly represented by the bread and the wyne And though we say that the bread eād the wyne be no nother but signes we meane not to denye the effects that the spyrite of god of the which the same sacraments be the mynistery doth worke in the beleuers that receiue them For by meanes of the sacraments the trewe beleuers be as it were by certen signes and seales of god confirmed in his promises and be assuered of gods grace and of many benyfites which god doth geue vs through Christ but we doo only denye that Christ is body lythere for so moch as that to work thes effectis which we say that the sacraments by the verteu of the holy gost doo work it suffiseth that they be signes appoynted by god to that end And it nedeth not that Christ shuld be there bodyly present nor that there shuld be made any change of the sustances of the breade and the wyne The second reason Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Further this sacrament was instituted by Christ in remembrans as the wordes them selues of the same insttucion doo witnes saing Doo this in mi rememberans If it be so than that it was instituted for remembrans it is not necessary that Christ should be bodyly there and moch lesse that there should be made
any turnyng of the bread and the wyne in to his body and blood because that the bread and the wyne doo suffise to bring to remembrans his passion and his body and blood geuen for our ransom As the paschal lamb was sufficient to bring to remēberans the passe ouer that is to say the passing by of the Angel in Egypt Yea it is not only not necessary that he shuld be there but if he were there he shuld be there in vayne becaus he shuld be there in such sort as shuld help nothing to remēberans for so moch as that he could not be seene And it is behouefull that the signes that bring a thing to rememberans as the sacramentes doo shuld be seeable And it is well knowen to what end the sacramētes were instituted that is to say because we be bodyed as the old doctors say and among the rest Chrysostom vpō mathew the. 83. Omelye the which sayth that therfor they were instituted that by them as by certē seeable signes our mynd shuld be styrred vp to the spyrituall and vnseeable things signified by the same sacramētes And therfor saint Augustne calleth the sacraments seeable wordes so that if we were vnbodied it neded not to institute them The reason standeth in this The sacraments were instituted in remēbrans of Christes body and blood geuen for vs. That which seruith for remembrāce as an owtward signe ought to be seeable Christes body and blood if thei were in the sacrament shuld be vnseeable therfor thei shuld nothing serue to put vs in remembrance If thei shuld no waie serue to put vs in remembrance than it is not necessary nor conuenient that thei shuld be bodily present in the sacrament And it is enough that the seeable signes shuld be there that is to say the bread and the wine which may work that is to say which may bring to remembrances the body and blood the which thing Christes bodily presens in the sacramēt could not doo I confirme this reason thus If Christ be there bodily present in the sacrament of thanksgeuing and the substāces of the breade and the wine be changed in to his body and blood we must say that either this is by a comen and generall right of a sacrament the which shuld belong not only to this but also to all the other sacraments orels by a particular and speciall right of this sacrament only That is to say that this and not the rest shuld haue this prerogatiue Of necessitie it must be by one of thes ij rightes or els by them both But first we can not say that it is by a comon and generall right of a sacramēt that is to say that if a thing be a sacrament it shuld be necessary that the thing signified by the same sacramēt shuld there be present and moch lesse that ther shuld be made any turning of the substances this can not be sayd because that their things signified ought thā to be there present in all the other sacramēts ād that there shuld be made a changing of the substances But we doo see the cōtrary for somoch as that in all the other sacraments the substāce remayneth as at the first and is not changed and there was neuer any man that wold say any such thing If thei wold speake of the old sacraments and of the sacramētes of the hebrewes that is to sai of the circumcision of paschal lamb of the rock owt of which issewed the water in the desert and of the manna the which things were sacraments to that people because thei were to thē signes of holy things no one of thes dyd euer change the substance for to be a sacrament The flesh of the paschal lamb remained flesh as before And we will sai the same of the rock and of the manna that there was no maner change of substancc The newe sacramentes also of the Christian people thei also doo not change substance The water of baptisme remaineth water as before The other likewise which be by the scoole men and newe doctors cownted for sacraments that is to say Creame Oile which thei call holy Penans Orders and matrimony the which in deede be no sacraments becaus thei were not instituted by Christ for sacraments thei doo not change their substances but remaine in their first substance and there is made no maner of change This is clere so that there nedeth not by comon and general right of sacraments to put Christes bodied presens in the sacrament and moch lesse to affirme that there shuld be made a substanciall changing of the bread and the wine in to his body and blood Nor we ought not neither to say that by particular and speciall right of this sacrament Christ shuld be bodily present nor that there shuld be made such maner of change For so moch as that the particular right of this sacramēt is cheeflie that it shuld be a signe sondred from the other sacramēts that is to say that it shuld be bread and wine in substance which be things diuers from the other sacraments And further that it shuld haue a particular and diuers significacion from the other that is to say that it is instituted to bring particularly to our rememberans Christes passion and death and that it shuld represent vnto vs how Christ gaue his body and shed his blood for our ransoming This is the particular and speciall right of this sacrament by the which it is sondri and diuers from the other sacraments But it is not necessary by this ryght that there shuld be made a change of the substances of the breade and wine and that Christ shuld be in the sacrament For the breade and wine remayne in their substances as thei were first and may withowt that that Christ shuld be present in the sacrament work thes effects that is to say bring to our rememberans and represent vnto vs Christes passion and death and how he hath geuen his body and blood for our ransoming It is ynough for the working of this rememberans that thei haue a newe significacion It is not necessary to change the substances as in the first reason we haue sayd Yea I say that seing the sacraments were instituted to th entent that thei shuld be trewe signes of holy things their substance must nedes remayne as it was first For otherwise thei shuld not haue agrement and likelied with ther things signified nor thei shuld not be trewe signes As for example baptisme hath lykelihode with the spiritual wasshing because it is water And as the water wassheth ād clēseth the body so be thos that beleue in Christ spiritually clēsed ād wasshed frō their sinnes but if the Water of baptisme shuld not remaine water but shuld chāge the substance it shuld not haue such agreement Soo we will say of the breade and the wine that therfor thei haue likelied with Christes body and blood because thei abide still breade ād wine for so moch as that euen as
the breade and the wine doo noryssh and mainteine the life of the body so Christes body and blood receiued spiritually and thorow faith in to the mind doo norissh and mainteine vs in the spirituall life And for this cause Christ Iesus called his flessh verily meate and his blood verily drinck But if the substance of breade and wine shuld not abide but the only withcommes shuld remaine there shuld not be that liklihode and agreement which this sacrament requireth because that the only withcommes of breade and wine withowt the substances can not norissh And whan the dewe agreemēt ād likelyhode is not there thei shuld not be trewe signes and consequently thei shuld not be trewe sacraments And here it may be seene that thei of this opinion destroie the sacraments making them not to be trewe but vaine signes taking from them the growndwork of their trewe meaning A nother reason is this The third reason If Christ were bodilie in the sacrament it should be nothinge profitable forsomuch as that the onelie spirituall eatinge of Christ is that Iohan. 6. that is profitable as the same Christ himself said to them that thought whan he said that his bodie was meat ād his bloude drinke ād that it was behouefull for the hauinge of life to eat his flesh and to drinke his blode They thought I say that he ment to speake of the bodily eatinge and drinkinge sending the one and the other thorow the mouthe in to the stomake as also they beleue that hold that Christ should be personalli and bodely in the sacrament What said Christ to these maner of men The spirit is that whiche geueth life the flesh helpeth nothinge that is to saye when I saie that you must eate my fleshe ād drīk my bluode I meane that you must eat my flesh and drink my bluode spiritually ād after this sorte they geue lyfe but my flesh eaten and my blood dronken as you vnderstand it do help nothinge It is necessary for the geuing of lyfe that my flesh be eaten and my blood be dronken spiritually and not fleshly Christ is eaten and his blood is dronken spiritually as he him self declareth whē mē beleue in him And Augustine ī the exposiciō of the said words saith Crede et māducasti that is to sai beleue and thou hast eaten geuinge to vnderstād that Christs intent was when he said these words that is to sai that it was behoufull to eat his flesh and drink his blood to say that it was behouefull to beleue in him And after this sorte his body was eaten and his blode was dronken And the text it self geueth vs to vnderstand that this is trewe the which saith first that the fathers will is that euery one that beleueth in Christ should haue lyfe euerlafting And a fewe words he addeth veryly veryly I say vnto you he that beleueth in me hath lyfe euerlaftinge I am the bread of lyfe And a litle after he saith if you shall not eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drink his blood you shall not haue lyfe in you He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath lyfe euerlastinge If thes wordes spoken by Christ be trew as necessaryly thei must be trew because Christ cannot tell an vntroth It doth necessaryly folow that the eatinge his flesh and drinking his bloode is none other but to beleue in him or at the least that the eatinge his flesh and drinking his blood and the beleuing in him be things so ioyned to gether that they cannot be separate the one frō the other The reason is this becauce that if these words were not the same in sentence or ells that thei were suche as might be separated the one from the other that is to say that the one might be trew without the other we must needs say that a man might be saued and haue the lyfe euerlasting without the eating of Christs flesh and drinking his blood the which is against Christs expresse wordes who saieth that he can not haue lyfe that eateth not his flesh and drinketh not his blood Or els we must nedes saye that a man might be saued not beleuinge in Christ This is clere because Christ saith that he that eateth his flesh and drinketh his blood hath lyfe euerlasting If it be so that man is saued by eating his flesh and drinking his blood when as this eating and drinkinge be not the same that beleuinge is or els that they may be separated that is to sai that the eating and drinkinge should be without the beleuing a man then shall haue life euerlastinge without beleuing in Christ the which likewise is against Christs expresse words who will that he that bebeleueth should be saued ād he that beleueth not should be damned Seing then that the one ād the other of these two sainges be trew that is to saie that he that eateth Christs fleshe ād drinketh his blood hath lyfe euerlasting and he that dothe not this can not haue it And this other also is trewe that is to saie he that beleueth in Christ hath lyfe euerlastinge and he that doth not beleue cannot haue it It followeth of necessitie that to eate Christs flesh and to drink his blood and to beleue in him should be one self thinge or els yf they should not be the same at the least that they could not by any meanes be separated that is to saie the one to be without the other I haue made this longe discourse to make men vnderstand that these words of Christ of the eating of his flesh and drinking his blood be not to be vnderstand of the bodyly eatinge and drinking and much lesse are to be vnderstand of the eating and drinking the sacrament of the lords supper but of the onely spirituall eatinge and drinkinge and thei that alledge them of the body or els of the sacramentall eating or drinking do alledge them out of the purpose Further also to make men know the chefe purpose that is to sai that althoughe Christ were bodely in the sacramēt it should helpe nothing because that the fleshly eating after what so euersorte it should be done doth nothing proffit to the witnessing of Christ seing the spiritual eatinge onely is that which geueth life And if any wold answer and saie that when Christ said that the flesh did help nothinge that he did meane that it did help nothing whan it was eaten as they did vnderstand it to whome Christ spake that is to saie the Capernaits the which thought that he did meane to saie that they should eat his flesh as the flesh of the shambells is eaten and drink his blood as wine and water is dronk But Christ in the sacrament is eaten after suche a certene sort as he is not seane nor perceauid no nor chewed because he is in the same sacrament vndiuideably nor his flesh is not eaten nor blood dronken for to norish the body as other bodelie meates but to norishe the soule
And therfore Christ reprouid the Capernaties because thei vnderstode him euel fauoredly and not as he wold be vnderstand This answer is nothinge for whan Christ said that the flesh helpeth nothinge but the spirite is that which geueth life he ment that the only spirituall eating the which is done with the harte and with the minde thorow belefe was that which helped but the bodily and fleshly eating helped nothing after what so euer sort it should be done There is no doubt but though that Christ be not eaten in peeces and partes orels chawed as other flesh is chawed and eaten as the Capernaites did vnderstand it Yet not with standinge after what so eauer sort he should be eaten by the bodily mouth whether it were by parts or whole as they of the first opinion beleue the which will that Christ great and thick as he was vpon the wood of the crosse shuld be wholy in the sacrament that is to say in that litle host as they call it This is a fleshly aÌ„d bodely eating for so much as that a thing is no whit lesse bodely eaten whan it is put all hole into the mouth and sent into the stomake as Ionas was wholy swalowed by the whale or as the pills that be receauid whole It is no whitlesse bodely eaten I say theÌ„ if it were eateÌ„ by partes I therfor by the bodily eatiÌ„g do meane that which is not of the spirite This of the whiche they speak that is done by the mouthe is not with the minde therfor it is bodely If it be bodelie it helpeth nothiÌ„ge I wil say to be shorte that if Christ were bodily preasent in the sacrameÌ„t that his being there should be nothinge ê“fitable at all althoughe that we should eat his flesh aÌ„d driÌ„k his bluode a thousaÌ„d times for so much as that the spiritual eating and drinkinge onely the which is by faith beleuinge truely in him is that whiche helpeth The bodely and fleshly eating and drinking his body and blood the which is done by the mouth helpeth nothing They then do litle honour to Christ that wold that he should be really in the sacrament because they wold bringe to passe that Christ should haue made vnprofitable thinges the whiche we may not think much lesse speake But because we haue said that the onely spirituall eating and drinking Christs flesh and bluode is that which helpeth and not the bodely some man might saye to what purpose then did Christ institute the sacramentall eatinge and drinkinge the which is not spirituall but bodelye c. To this I answer that the sacrameÌ„t was therfore iÌ„stituted by Christ because that although the eatinge and drinkiÌ„ge of it be not spirituall but bodely yet not with standing it serueth and is profitable to the spirituall eating and drinking the whiche is by faith for so much as the sacrament doth confirme vs in faith because it is ordeyned to this end Not that it shuld already haue this power of it self but because it is an instrument or els a ministerie of the spirite ioined to the word of the holye gospell with which instrument and ministerie the same spirite worketh in vs And it is not necessarye that Christ should be bodelye in the sacrameÌ„t to serue for the eating and drinkinge spiritually and by faith it is enoughe that the bread and the wyne as holye signes be there for vs as we will better tell you in the last reason And whan I say that the spirituall eating and drinkinge onelye is proffitable and not the bodelie I meane of the bodely eating of the same trew bodye and of the bodely drinking of the trew bloude of Christ put into the mouth as the Capernaites did meane and as they affirme the which wold haue Christ to be really in the sacrameÌ„t both in bodye aÌ„d soule I do not meane of the sacramentall eating the which without doubt is profitable when it is ioyned with the spirituall And whan it is not ioyned it is not onely not profitable but it is damnable as Saint Paule saieth in the first to the Corinthians because it is vnworthelie receaued 1. Corin. 11. If Christ then be not really in the sacrament the substances of the bread and the wine be much lesse chaunged but do both abyde in substance as be fore The fourth reason Another reason is this and it is particularlie against the opinion of transsubstanciation that is to saye of them that would that the bread and the wine shuld be chaunged into Iesu Christes bodye aÌ„d blode aÌ„d that there shuld remaine no more of the bread and the wine but the withcommes that is to saye the white coloure of the bread the coloure of the wine the taste of the one and the other the roundnes or other forme of the same bread And so we will saie of the other withcommes that is to saie of the moystines drines heat and could This opinion cannot stand with those effectes that we may manifestlie see and that experience it self doth shew vs. First the sacrament is hable to norishe bodelie wherfore if there were one that should eat a quantitie of hostes and wine consecrated they wold norishe as other bread and wine not consecrated Further it is seen by experience that the sacrament somtimes is corrupted and wormes be ingendered in it as in other bread and wine not consecrated But how caÌ„ these effects be wrought this opinioÌ„ standinge of the chaunginge of the bread and the wine into Christs body and blood the onely withcommes of the bread and the wine remayning How can the withcommes norish without the substance What is to norishe but that the substance of the meat and drink is turned into his substance that eateth and drinketh it Seurly the withcommes without substance cannot norishe because that norishing meaneth chauÌ„ging of the substaÌ„ce of the meat into the substaÌ„ce of the thinge norished we caÌ„not now say that the substaÌ„ce of Christs bodie aÌ„d blood should be that which should norishe because that the thiÌ„ge that norisheth is as we haue said coÌ„uerted iÌ„to the substaÌ„ce of hiÌ„ that receaueth it Christes body aÌ„d bluod â—â—iÌ„g iÌ„mortal aÌ„d vncorruptible be not receiueable of such chaunges Like as we haue said of the norishemeÌ„t we wil say of the ingeÌ„deringe the which we may see is made in the sacrameÌ„t wheÌ„ the wormes be engeÌ„dered How caÌ„ a substance be engendered of the only withcommes Here thy of this opinion be intangled and they answer some after one sorte and some after another Innocentius the thirde in his booke of the office of the masse saith that euen as the substance of the bread is miraculously turned into the substance of Christs body the withcommes only of the bread and the wine remaininge so the substance of the bread of the which the wormes or any other thinge might be engeÌ„dered may miraculouslie returne Egidius Romanus in his Theoremes of Christs bodie saith that such an engeÌ„deriÌ„ge is nat miraculous but natural for
because saith he that the reasonable mīde althoughe it be made by god onelie yet not with stādīge for as muche as god hath disposed ād ordened that after the bodie of the creature be fashioned in his mothers wōbe the reasonable soule is put into the same creatures bodie ād this is a natural poinct by the reasō of gods order takē therin ād if it were otherwise it shuld be a gainst the order of nature Euen so seinge that god hath ordeined that the withcōmes shuld be grownded in the substance as soone as the withcommes of the bread and the wine be corrupted immediatly by the natural order that he hath geuē to things doth creat the matter ād doth put it vnder thother withcommes newlie brought in of the which matter the wormes be after engendered Some other say that a norishinge matter may be engēdered in the priests stomake the whiche with the sacramēt receaued may easely norishe although the formes that is to say the withcommes of the bread and the wine of them selfes should not norishe Certein other haue said that euen as god by miracle hath made that the withcomes of bread and wine should be without subiect as though they were substances so he geueth them the nature of the substāces of the bread and wine that is to say that the wormes may be engēdered of the withcommes and so we must say that by miracle substances may be engendered of things whiche be no substances although such a matter be imposible by nature But what dreames what imaginacions and let them pardō me what mōsters be these who maketh thē fuer that it is so as for example frō whence gathereth Innocentius that the substance of the bread should miraculously returne And Egidius Romanus that god should creat new matter and should put it vnder the withcōmes newly brought in and vnder the shape of a thinge newly engēdred And those other that a norishinge matter should be engendered in the stomake And finally the last of all that by gods might a substance should be engendered of the withcommes If in a matter of our faith we wil after this sorte dallie ād gesse at a vēture without the holy scripture we may thēn settforth and affirme al that we list as thoughe it were trew ād tel as many phātasies and fables I will not say follies as shall come in oure head We ought not to dresse vp gods things after oure maner ād as toies come in our braine but we must handle them with fear and reuerence ād with gods words and walk suerly not accordinge to oure owne phātasies Without doubt this Imaginatiō of the chaunginge of the substance of the bread and wine into Christs bodie ād blode and that the onely withcomes of the bread and the wine remaine is false but the substances of the bread and wine remaine for if they should not remaine these euident and open effectes could not be wrought that is to saie the norishinge ād new ēgēderinge which be made The cause whie they speak thus that is to say without ani maner of groundeworke ād be forced to graunt to mani incōueniences is because they defend an euell and an vniust cause and therfore they must graunte many inconueniences And in dede as it is commenly said they wote not what they fishe for beare with me you readers seing I tell the trueth Another reason is this The fift reason God is not wont to work miracles but for to cōfirme the faith of the beleuers ād his doctrine as it is writtē in sainct mark in the end of his gospell Marci 16. And the miracles that Christ worketh for to confirme his word and the faith of the beleuers be seealbe thinges as it is manifest lokinge thorow all the miracles that Christ and the Apostels wrought as geuing sight to the blinde clensinge the leepers makinge the domme to speak the lame to go healing the feuered and the other sick reising the dead walking on the water of the sea cōmaūdinge the wīds chaunging the water into wine driuing awaie the deuels satisfyng with a few loaues ād certeine fishes many thousand persons All these miracles were seen and therfore did confirme the doctrine of the holy gospell but if they had bene secret that none had seene them they had helped nothing to that matter that is to saie to confirme the faith of any Seing it is thus then that god therfore worketh miracles to confirme his doctrine and the faith of the beleuers and the miracles could not work such effects if they were not openly seen to what purpose then shuld Iesus Christ as great and as thick as he was vpon the wood of the crosse and as he is preasently in heauen be hidden whole vnder a small cake and a litle wyne much lesse without comparison then his bodye is and all his blood To what purpose were it to work this most great miracle that it should not be seen when it were ones done to what purpose were it to work that other that Christ should be whole in the whole sacrament and whole in euery parte of the sacrament as though he were a spirite to what purpose were it to work that Christ should be bodely in heauen and in earth here ād on all the aultars where the masse is saide to what purpose were it that the bread and the wine should be turned into Christs body and blood To what purpose were it that the withcommes of the bread and the wine should abide without a subiect as thoughe they were substances All these most great and stonishinge myracles and greater then euer Christ wrought or that euer were hard of must nenedes be if Chist himself should be inclosed bodelie within that sacramēt ād yet not with standing no one of these miracles were euer seene as they are not nor can be possibly seene Seing then that such miracles cannot be seen to what end to what proffit or to what purpose should they be wrought when they are not hable nother to confirme Christs doctrine nor oure faith shall we saie that Christ wold work miracles and such miracles as were neauer the greater without any maner of profit suerly no if We wold not make god now lesse wise than men the which if thei haue reason will neauer do a thing that they be not perswaded is to purpose and profit for some end We must then saie that Christ is not bodely present in the sacrament but he is in heauen where he sitteth on the right hand of the father from whence he must come at the latter day to iudge the liuing and the dead And this may be another reason to proue that Christ The sixt reason in as muche as he is man is not personally in the sacramēt because the article of oure faith saith that he is ascēded īto heauē frō whence he shall come to iudge the liuing ād dead If Christ were really ī the sacramēt what should he nede on the latter
he should not haue neather the one nor the other of these two proê‘ties It foloweth I say that Christ in the sacrament should not haue a trew bodye yea no bodye because that his body be it where it will and as it will it cannot be separatid froÌ„ these two properties to a bodie most naturall aÌ„d inseparable according to Austen aÌ„d the troth Here they say that it is true speakinge naturally that these two conditions aÌ„d properties caÌ„not be separated from bodies but speaking supernaturally aÌ„d by miracle they may be separated froÌ„ the bodyes as in effectt they be separated from Christes bodye in the sacrameÌ„t To this I answer first that the substaÌ„tiall properties be neuer chaunged by miracle let them finde that god euer did it let them geue me one onely example We know that god is almighty and there is no maner thinge that may be done Impossible vnto him as the AuÌ„gell sayd to Marye but who knoweth that this thinge may be done I will not stand now to dispute this thinge I desier theÌ„ that they wold geue some other example but they will neauer do it Further I say that it belongeth to them to proue that god doth these miracles This is no good reason God can do it therfore he hath done it How many thinges caÌ„ god do that he hath not done God could haue sent more then twelue legions of Aungels for to delyuer Christ out of the Iewces hands Math. 26. as he himself doth witnes in S. Mat. aÌ„d yet he sent theÌ„ not And how many other thinges might we alledge if we wold that god can do aÌ„d yet he doth them not Thei must proue then that god doth these miracles By Christes sainges nor by the scriptures they cannot proue it except that they will alledge that Christ hath sayd it that is to say this is my body shewing the bread and this is my blood shewing the wine but this is a tryflynge profe for somuch that Christ ment not by this manner of speache to affirme that he is within the bread and the wyne but ment to saye that both the one and thother were signes and a remembraunces of his body and blood as plainly we will shew hereafter Peraduenture they will say that in matters of faith there nedeth no profes but men must stand to the letter This thinge is of faith therfore it nedeth no profe I say that in matters of faith we must stand to gods worde with the right vnderstanding of it and trew sense of the words nor we must not geue theÌ„ other and straunge senses Contrary to the mynde of the spirite The sense of the spirite is not that Christ should be bodelye in the host and in the cupp as it is sayde but it is that whiche we haue said and will better saye in the talke that foloweth where we will declare the maÌ„ners of sacramentall speaches according to the scripture And to be short that we may end now at leÌ„ght this reasoninge I saye that this opinion of the being of Christs body aÌ„d bluode in the sacrament doth diminishe the troth of Iesus Christs trew bodye and trew bluode And it maketh him to haue in the sacrameÌ„t a phantasticall body aÌ„d much more phantasticall then Martiane aÌ„d Manicheus who wheÌ„ they spake of Christ and apointed him notrew and naturall body but a phantasticall and Imaginable orels a seming bodie they saied things lesse striuing against nature then this opinion because they did neauer deuide Christs bodie nor speak of him things so vnimaginable as this opinion doth nor they neauer said that he was in two places at ones This opinioÌ„ maketh him to be in that he is man In infinite places nor they neauer said that a great bodie was conteined in so litle a thinge as these meÌ„ say aÌ„d so we wil saie of the other so many ImaginacioÌ„s which the forsaid opinioÌ„ placeth And yet though Manicheus aÌ„d MartiaÌ„ did say these or like things as they say It should haue bene lesse in coÌ„uenieÌ„t seinge they did apoint him a fantastike and a semeable bodie But this opinion affirming that Christ hath a trew and a naturall body in the sacrament doth yet speake such things of him as neather can be in dede nor be not Imaginable and be without all reason without also gods worde aÌ„d more reproweable as to this theÌ„ the fore said opinioÌ„s I meane of Manicheus and Martion and without doubt they speak things disagreing to themselues Furthermore if Christ be in the sacrament what meaneth it that the old church wheÌ„ should make the consecration of the bread aÌ„d wine did singe the preface as it is called Sur sum Corda that is to say lift vp your harts on highe aÌ„d also these words be now said in al the masses Suerly we ought to haue our harts where Christ aÌ„d our treasour is as he himself in S. Math Matth. 5. saith that is to saie where your treasoure shal be there will your hartes be Oure treasoure ought to be where Christ is And S. Paule to the Colossians saith Coloss 3. If you be risen againe together with Christ that is to saie If leauing the euell you haue taken the good aÌ„d new life to the likenes of Christ who leauinge the corruptible and mortal life hath takeÌ„ the incorruptible Immortal aÌ„d glorious life seek things which be aboue where Christ is who sitteth on the right hand of god seek those things that are aboue aÌ„d not the earthly things geuinge vs to vnderstaÌ„d that seing Christ Iesus is oure treasour aÌ„d all oure welth we ought to haue our harts were he is If it be so then that we ought to haue our hartes where Christ is let him be in what so euer place he will what neded it that the old church should admonish the people that they should lift vp there harts on highe that is to say into heauen if by and by after a few words he should haue desceÌ„ded into bread and into wine what need we to seek Christ so farr of that is to say in heaueÌ„ if he be so nere vs that is to say in that bread and that wine This sainge Sursum corda suerly geueth vs to vnderstand that the old church did not beleue that Christ was bodelie in the sacrameÌ„t for if they had beleued it they wold neauer haue said lift vp your hartes on highe but they wold haue said be you atteÌ„t o you faithfull for by aÌ„d by Christ Iesus oure lord shal be here present in the bread aÌ„d the wine as sone as the coÌ„secratioÌ„ is made Direct youre minds to the bread and the wine whaÌ„ they shal be coÌ„secrated because Iesus Christ shal be ther bodely but they said not after this sorte they haue in dede said lift vp your hartes on highe geuing to vnderstand that they beleued that Christ was in heauen and not in the sacrament The ninth reason The ninth reason is this and it gainsaieth the
turnekindinge If the bread be turned into the body and the wine into the bluod because Christ said this is my body shewinge the bread ād this is my bluode shewing the wine and that els Christs words should not haue benetrue if the bread should not haue bene turned into the body ād the wine into the bluode or at the least that Christs bodye should be in the bread and his bluode in the wine It followeth that the paschal lamb which Christ did eat with his disciples was turned into the passeouer because Christ said the lāb is the passouer as it is written in luke I haue earnestly desired to eat this passouer with you before I suffer Luk. 22. if is clere that by this word passouer Christ did meane the paschal lāb ād because that pascha is that going ouer and passing by that the Angell made whē he passed ouer the hebrues not entering in but onely entered into the Egiptiās houses killing theire first borne as we haue in Exodus Exod. 12. we shal be cōpelled to say that that lāb was turned into that same going ouer or passing by or els that that going ouer or passīg by was in that lamb according to there opinion that will that Christ should be really in the sacrament the substances of the bread and wine remaininge And because that that going ouer was not then when Christ said those words that is to saie that that lamb was the pascha or passouer but it was onely in Moyses time in Egipt it followeth that he did eat a thinge that was not behold what maner things do folow their opinion that wold that Christ should be bodily in that host and that cup because he spake these words this is my body shewinge the bread and this is my bluode shewinge the wine For so much as it is no lesse true that the lamb is the pascha or passouer then that bread ād that wine be Christs body ād bluod because Christ who cannot lie hath spoken th one and thother And god himself said the lamb is the passouer It was therfore of necessitie that the lamb should be turned into the passouer or at the least that that passouer should be in that lāb because god said soo If we will say that Christ hath geuen to the words of the Sacramēt of the bread ād the wine the power to make the turninge of th one ād tother into the body and bluod but he hath not gewen the pouer to thother words of the lamb to turne it into the passouer orels that the passouer should be the lamb Exod. 12. This saing must nedes be self willed and without reason because the one and thother is a sacrament and is made for remembrance the lamb was ordeined in remembrance of that passouer of the aungell that was in Egipt the bread and the wine in remembraunce of Christs body and bluod geuen for oure raunsominge Furthermore they must shew how Christ hath geuen suche power to those words that is to saie this is my body and this is my bluod that by vtteringe them such turning should be made orels that his body and bluod should be made present They shal neauer be hable to shewe this their self wild talk to be true neather by the holy scripture as it were behoue full thei should do Intending to affirme such a matter ād much lesse by any maner of reason auailable Further though it were so that Christ had geuē such power to the words yet he gaue it not but to those words that he thē said whan he did institute the sacramēt ād not to other And this they of the same opiniō do cōfesse but the words that Christ spake thē be no more true because he spake thē of the time to come and not of the time past that is to say this is my bodi the which shal be geuē for you and this is my bluod the whiche shal be shed for you These words were thē true because that his body was not yet geuē nor his bluod shed but they were to be geuē but now they be no more true but false because that euē as Christ now cā no more die nor suffer so cā he no more geue his bodie nor shed his bluod For so much as if he could do these things he should be sufferable and mortall ād this cānot be Therfore if these words had power to work those effects thē false words should haue had pouer to turne the substances orels to make Christ present in the sacrament but if they be true thē haue they power to make Christ sufferable ād mortal I cōfirm this reasō thus If because Christ said those wosds this is my body ād this is my bluod such turning should be made or els that he should be present in the sacramēt there wold folow inconueniences because that we shuld be compelled to saie that all the speeches of the scripture and of god in the which is affirmed that a thing is other this or that seing that god can not tel an vntroth we shal be compelled I say to affirme and graunt that it is so as the words seme to say And so we shal be cōpelled to graunte that the Testament or gods couenaunt whither you will call it should be there in the same circumcision For so much as that god as we haue in the Genesis said to Abram whan he did institute the circumcision Gene. 17. this is my couenant speaking of the same circumcision and for all that the circumcision was not that couenaunt but onely a signe of that couenaunt as in the same place that is to say the same chapter it is plaine that god called the circumcision the signe of his couenaūt It is plaine that the signe of a thinge is not the self same thinge And yet god said that the circumcisiō was the couenaunt We shal be compelled to graunt that that fearfull fantasy the which appered to Saule 1 Regū 28. as we haue in the first boke of the kings was Samuel in deed because the scripture there dothcal it Samuel and yet al the Catholike doctours say ād affirme that it was a fātasie ād a deceipt of the deuel ād not Samuell And we shal be compelled also to saie that because Christ said that he was the vine that he was so in dede And because the scripture calleth Christ a rock a lyon a lamb a shepe and as many other things as it speaketh of him we shal be compelled to affirme that Christ in dede was all those things But what will they say to Christs owne words in the same institution of the sacrament Christ did not onely say this is my body and this is my bluod but he said takinge the cupp Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. as luke ād paule do affirme this cup is my new testamēt in my bluode These words be aswell trew as those this is my body and this is my bluod ād Christ did aswell sai
things There was not withstanding difference betwene those sacraments ād oures because that thei beside that they were apointed to spirituall things serued also for the bodely things that is to say to the necessitie of the present lyfe for so much as the manna and the water were their dayly meat and drink so that they had two vses the one spirituall because it was to them a sacrament the other bodely the which serued to the necessitie of their bodyes Our sacraments be not so the which be taken onely for the spirituall vse that is to say for sacraments and not for the necessitie of the body To cōclude therfore I saie that seing Christ cānot be eatē nor drunke but after one of these two sorts that is to say spiritually and by faith and then sacramentally also And after these two sortes Christ may be receaued though he be not really that is to say in body and in soule in the sacramēt It is not therfore proffitable and much lesse necessary to affirme such reall being in the same sacrament They that say that Christ is really in that host and in that cup do not know what meaneth to eat and drink Christ sacramentally for so much as that to eat and drink sacramētally as we haue said is none other but to receaue the sacrament that is to say the signe of the holy thinge and doth not meane to take bodely the self same thinge that is represented by the sacrament I might if I wold and did not feare to be tedious to the readers make dyuers other reasons also but it nedeth not and those that we haue made do suffice But let vs put the case that we had made no one reason to proue this oure negatiue that is to say that Christ is not really in the sacrament nor there is not made any turninge of the bread and the wyne into his body and bluod nor that we had not alledged any saing of the scripture the which not withstanding god ayding vs we haue sufficiently done let vs put the case I say that we had done no one of those things yet they of the contrary opinion should not by this haue had their purpose because that it doth not belong to vs to proue our negatiue but it belongeth to them to proue there affirmatiue For eueri one that affirmeth any sainge is boūd if he speak reasonably to proue it If it were not already so plaine that euery man might see it He that denyeth is not boūd to proue his negatiue It is not enough for a mā of what so euer aucthoritie he be for to be beleued to say it is so the matter stādeth thus but he must proue his affirmatiue sainge chefely if it be a matter of weight ād pertaining to faith as this is Nor it is not enough nether to be hable to defend and maintaine it for so much as that many false opinions be with witt with distinctions with wrangelinges and intangelinges defended as thoughe they were true We mai see this by experience in the schoole doctoures and questionists for few or none of them do agree to gether but they be of contrary and d◅uers opinions and alwaies euery one of them defendeth his oune fantasies and they striue cōtinually and it is neauer knowen who hath the right and they confound the minds of men they lose the tyme and cause other also to lose it I desire then of these maner men that they wold proue this their rule or opinion that is to say that Christ is bodely in the sacrament and that the substance of the bread and the wyne be turned into his body and bluod I desire that they wold proue it me other by reason or such aucthoritie as I should be boūd to beleue This my request is iust reasonable and honest By reason they can not proue it this is clere and themselues by agrement do confesse it by aucthoritie how do they proue it They bring furth the old doctours they alle◅ge the determinations of popes and of Councels the common opinion of the churche last of all they alledge Christs words when he did institute the supper that is to say this is my body shewinge the bread and this is my bluod shewinge the wyne and Christs sainge also in S. Iohn Io. 6. that is to saye I am the bread of lyfe I am the lyuinge bread that am come doune from heauen and he that eateth of this bread shall lyue for eauer And the bread which I shall geue is my flesh which I will geue for the lyfe of the world And after truely truely I say vnto you if you eat not the flesh of the sonne of man and drink not his bluode you shall not haue lyfe in you he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath lyfe euerlastinge And further my flesh is veryly meat and my bluode is veryly drink these be the aucthorities that thei alledge To the which aucthorities I answer and first to those of the old doctours that is to say as for exāple of Ireneus Tertulian Cyprian Origen Hilary Athanasius Basill Iōh Chrisostom Gregory Nazianzene Gregory Nicene Cyrill Ambrose Iherom Augustine And such other holy fathers the which labored for Christs church in wrytinge bokes expounding the scripture disputinge against heretiks preachinge and teachinge wherby they do in dede deserue to be honoured for their lerninge and holynes but I say that no one of them nor of the other anucients was cauer of this opinion that Christ should be bodely in the sacrament and much lesse that the substances of the bread and wyne should be turned into his body and bluod but in dede they haue sayd the contrary And thoughe somtyme it semeth that they should affirme that the bread and the wyne be Christes body and bluode yet this is for none other cause but that they speak of the sacraments after the maner of the scripture the which doth call them by the name of the thinges signified by them as we oftē finde that Augustine did Who very often hath declared such maner of speches as we will tell here after And let vs admit also that all the old doctours had bene of that opinion and that all the world wold say it yet ought we not to beleue them if thei bringe not furth the witnes of the holy scripture because that this is a thinge pertaining to faith and faith is ground wrought onely vpon gods worde as paule saith to the Romains Ro. 10. faith cōmeth of hearinge but hearinge is by the worde of god he doth not say by the word of men the whiche may all err but he sayeth it commeth of gods word and the holy scripture is gods worde Let them alledge vs in such thinges the holy scripture and we will beleue them els not And if any wold say and the scripture also was made by men therfore we ought not to beleue it I answer that the scripture is writ-told and made by the holy
gost as peter saieth in the second Epistle 2. Pet. 1. and it was confirmed with great signes and meruelous miracles Nor no ◅ue of the fathers or old doctours did ◅auer desire that they should be beleued as the holy scripture but they all with one voice do say and chefely Saint Augustine that concerninge matters of fayth we should so farr beleue them as is found in the holye scripture and none otherwise And thei will that it should be laufull to denye any men yea let them be of what so euer holynesse learninge and aucthoritie you will but not to deny the holy scripture Tell me who is he that wold beleue the article of the trinitie althoughe the whole world had told him if it were not plaine in the holy scriptures who wold beleue the article of the incarnation of the sonne of god and the other articles of the fayth If gods word had not told it What can men know of such thinges except so much as god oppeneth vnto them by the scripture Loke vpō Austen in the 19 epistle The 19. pistell where he sayth in sentēce that he beareth this honoure towards the Canonicall bokes of the scripture that he beleueth seurly that no one of them hath ◅rred but for all the rest he may deny them if thei do not proue their suings by the holy scripture The 3. pistell The very same in meaninge he sayth in the hundreth and eleuenth epistle writing to fortunatianus the bishop They all beside all this that I haue sayd were of this opiniō that Christ in that he is m◅ is only in heauē bodely In the se second boke against the denatists cap. 3. Let vs say the same of the determinacions of popes and of coūcels that all may err Austen in the second boke against the donatists sayth that the vniuersall former Coūcels may be amended by thē that folow If they may be amended suerly they may err and so they that folow after them who doubteth but they mai err aswell as they that go before And we by experience ma◅ see that many councels do err for one of thē doth gaynsay an other I speak not this because that men ought not to haue reuerence to councels when they be lawfully gathered together and in the holy gost and when the determinations that be made in them be accordinge to the holy scripture as the Councell of Nece was against Arrius The councell of Calcedone against Eutiches And certein other old councels the which had gods word for their rule And these onely were gathered to gether in Christs name and in the holy gost But I say in dede that whan they determine anye maner of thinge pertaining to fayth and do not stick to gods word that we ought not to obey such councels nor men ought not to beleue them And in our dayes we haue the example of the councell of Trent the goodly determinations that it made all at the popes good pleasure whome the bishoppes cannot gainsay because they haue all sworne neauer to go against the sea Apostolike What estimation should men haue of such coūcels where no respectt is had to gods honoure nor to his worde and such as be gathered together against Christ for to quēche him out and to establish the kingdō of Antichrist shal we allow such coūcels This is a cheefe grounde The faithfull Christian is not bounde nor ought not in matters pertaining to faith to beleue the hole world together if they do not bringe forth gods worde that is to say the holy scripture for their witnesse Wel now thei wil say that they haue gods worde that is to saye Christes words who sayd this is my body and this is my bluod she winge the bread and the wyne therfore the bread and wyne be turned into Christes body and bluod and Christ is wholly in the host and in the wyne Further he sayd those words in the sixt chapter of Ihon aboue recyted where he willeth that we should eat his flesh and drink his bluod and this is not done except in the sacrament therfore he is bodely in the sacrament I answer first to those words this is my body and this is my bluod and I aske where in the scripture at any tyme is found that suche a speche as This is my bodye and this is my bluode should meane this is turned into my body and into my bluod or els my body and my bluod be in these signes I neauer found this maner of speche Therfore the fore sayd words haue another meaninge then that the whiche they geue them or that whiche the scriptures vse that is to say this is the signe of my body shewinge the bread and this is the signe of my bluod shewinge the wyne as before we haue sayd and we will also better say in the declaration of those words This is in dede their meaninge To the saings of the sixt chapter of Ihon I say that they do not alledge thē to purpose because that there Christ doth not speak of the sacramentall eatinge but of the spirituall and by faith as in the third reason we haue declared yea as Christ him self doth expounde it in the text and so all the old doctours do expounde it And cheefely Augustine who sayth beleue ād thou hast eaten so that seinge that opinion of the turninge of the substāces of the bread and wyne into Christs body and bluod nor that of his bodely presence in the sacrament cannot be proued nether by reason nor any aucthoritie that auayleth we ought to conclude that it is a fayned inuention and imagination of men and commeth not from god The reasons of the true and Catholike opiniō beinge ended before that we answer to the obiections and ground workes of the partyes contrary to the trueth there remanith to mak apere that the opinion which we haue proued is that of the old church and the forenamed doctours and holy men And because I should be to long if I wold bringe the multitude of doctours It shall suffise me therfore to tell Augustines opinion a most ware and true expounder of the old and sound opinions the which Augustine holdeth not but the opinion of the Auntiens and that which was holdē in his tyme ād of his predecessours In his Epistle to bonifacius he writeth after this sorte Epistle 23. If the sacramēts should not haue some similitude of those things of the which they be sacraments they should be in no wyse sacraments And by this lykelynes those same sacraments many tymes take the name of the things them selues Euen us therfore after a certeyn meyns the sacrament of Christs body is Christes body the sacrament of Christes bluod is Christs bluode and so the sacrament of faith that is to say the baptisme is faith and is called faith See here Augustine how he vnderstandeth Christs speache when he sayth this is my body shewing the bread and this is my bluode shewinge the
wyne not to meane that the bread should be in dede Christes body and the wyne Christes bluod He meaneth not this But he meaneth that therfore the bread is called Christes body and the wyne his bluod because thei be sacramētes and signes of Christes body ād bluod Also in a boke the which is against Adimantus the Maniche in the xij chapter Augustine sayth Against Adimantus ca. 12 The lord doubteth not to sai and he speaketh of Christ this is my body when he gaue the signe of his body Here Austen plainly expoundeth this sainge of Christ that is to say this is my bodye that is as muche to saye as this is the signe of my body The 3. boke cap. 16. And in the third boke called de doctrina Christiana in the xvi he sayth that if that thinge whiche Christ commaundeth shall seme strange inconuenient or euell done then we ought not to vnderstand such speach accordinge to the letter but figuratyuely And geuinge the examples of these words of Christ that is to say If you eat not the fleshe of the sonne of man and drink not his bluod you shall not haue lyfe in you He saith that such speche ought not to be vnderstand accordinge to the letter because that vnderstanding it according to the letter it is a disagreable and an inconuenient thinge that is to say that the flesh of a man should be eaten and his bluod dronk And therfore it ought to be vnderstand soundly that is to say that Christ did not meane of the eating of his flesh and drinkinge his bluode fleshly but spiritually beleuinge in him and hauinge remembraunce of so great a benefit as he hath wrought vs sufferinge and dyinge for vs. And this is the eatinge and drinking that Christ ment of And to eat and drinke after this sorte It nedeth not that Christ should be really in the consecrated bread and wyne The thirty treatise vpō Ihon. but onely that the faith of Christ should be in vs. And in the xxx treatise vpon Iohn he sayth The lord is aboue that is to say in heauen but the lord that is the trueth is also here Christes body in the which he rose must nedes be in one place but his troth is euery where and he meaneth by the troth Christes godhead And in the epistle which he wryteth to dardanus he sayth he shall come for to iudge the lyuinge and the dead in the self same forme that he ascēded into heauen to the which forme he hath seurly geuen immortalitie but he hath not taken away the nature of it we may not thinke that according to this maner of forme that is to sai mans he should be spred abrode euery where For we must take hede that we do not so affirme his god head that we take away the truth of his body for it followeth not that that which is in god should be so euery where as god Of these two saings of Austen the which before we haue also alledged in the seauenth reason is concluded that Austen wil not that Christes body may be in more then one place at one tyme he will in dede that his god head should be euery where but not his manhode the whiche is in one onely place that is to say in heauen The master of the sentences glosinge or els expounding certeyn sainges of Augustine in the fourth of his sentences the tenth distinction where he bringeth furth amongst his other sainges this In the 4. of the sentences the tenth distinction that is to say that Christs body may be in one place but the trueth is spred abrode euery where he sayth that Christes body may be in one placeseable in mans forme but his truth that is to say his godhed is euery where vpon Ihon the sixt And he addeth the truth also of the same that is to say his very body is on euery aultare in euery place where men celebrate Sauinge his reuerēce this is not to set forth Austen mynd but it is to geue it straūge senses that he neauer ment and it is in dede a maiminge of his saings Austē by that word troth meaneth Christes godhed the whiche is powred abrode euery where and doth not meane the bodye and yet he doth notwithstāding expounde it for the body the whiche is as he sayth on all the aultares where thei celebrat And so he doth with many other saings of S. Augustine in the sayd distinction and in other where he speaketh of the matter of the thanks geuing mayming S. Augustines sainges and calling those heretikes that say the contrary that is to say that hold not that Christes bodyly presence is in the sacrament But we will let him glose at his will and say what pleaseth him And it is to be maruelled-at that he should so lightly and without reason pronounce these to be heretiks that speak nothinge contrary to gods word but they do in such sorte honoure it as they do not alow in the matter of religion and faith any more then so muche as the same word speaketh not mindinge to stand to mens opinions except they be agreable with the holy scripture The master of the sentences here geueth an vniust and a wicked iudgement But in the third boke of the trinitie The third boke of the trinite ca. 10. Augustine sayth that no myracle happeneth about the sacrament of Christes body and bluod If it be so that according to Saint Augustine there chaunceth no myracle about that sacrament he then beleued not that Christ shuld be bodelye in the sacrament for if he had beleued it he wold neauer haue sayd that there was no myracle but he wold haue sayd that there happened many and most great myracles as before in the fifth reason we haue seene Well it is playne then after Austens mynde that Christ is not really in bodye and in soule in the sacramēt but he calleth the cōsecrated bread ād wyne Christs bodye ād bluod because they be signes of his bodye and bluod not that they should be really and in dede his true body and bluod because he will that those should be in heauen and not on the earth in the sacrament We might if we wold alledge the other old doctours as Ireneus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Ambrose Ierome and Chrysostome all the whiche be of the self same opinion but let S. Austen suffise vs who amonge all the rest is the most faythfull witnes of all the auntientie And this we do to be shorte not withstandinge if any wold see these doctours sainges let him loke vpon Ireneus who herd Policarp Ihō the Euāgelistes disciple in the fourth ād fift boke that he maketh against heresies Let him loke vpon Tertullian that was next to Ireneus in the first fourth and fift boke against Martian the heretike Let him loke vpon Origen vpon leuiticus the seauenth and nynth homely Let him loke vpon Ambrose in the eleuenth chapter vpō the first epistle to the
Corinthians Let him loke vpon Chrisostom in the 83. homelye vpon S. Mathew Let him loke vpon Ierō vpon Ecclesiastes the thirde chapter all whose sainges for shortnes I leaue out Then it is playne that the opinion ād iudgemēt of the old churche Marke is that which before we haue proued And we must here marke that the old doctours intēdinge in their maner of speache to agree with the scripture the which whan it speaketh of the Sacramēts doth name them by the name of the thinges signified very oftē when they treat of the same sacraments and chefely of the thanks geuinge theical it many tymes bodye and bluod and they speak in suche sorte as it semeth thei meane to affirme the bodely presence of the body and bluod in the sacrament a thinge that they neauer intended The which thinge when the late wryters and chefely the schole men haue not taken hede to they haue boldely setfurth the bodely presence of th one and thother in the sacrament but they be deceaued for so much as that was neauer the opinion of the Auntientes And if any one wold bringe furth the boke of sacramentes ascribed to Ambrose the which putteth this new opiniō of Christes bodelye presence in the sacrament It may be boldely answered him that that boke was neauer Ambroses because that neyther the style of the speche was Ambroses nor the sentence the which is contrary to many his sainges in his other bokes Nor let no man maruell thoughe I denye those bokes to be Ambroses for many bokes were ascribed to the old doctoures that they neauer saw much lesse made as that boke of the true and false repentance ascribed to Austen the which teacheth against Austen naminge him and yet certein haue attributed it to him Certeine men of small consciences haue done this other that they might better sell such bokes or to make their opinions be beleued and to geue them auctoritie vnder the name of Auntients or els for some other respects scant honest It is no small fault to go aboute vnder other mens auctorities without their consent to make men beleue their opinions as it is a great faulte that their laboure and bokes should be attributed to other And I say more also againe that althoughe all the old doctours were of suche opinion that is to say that Christ were bodely present in the sacrament we be not bounde nor we ought not to beleue thē If they proue it not by the holy scripture the which they neauer did nor it can not be done And this is the signe that as mani as eauer were of this opinion could neauer hetherto mak reason that might auaile If this bodely presence of Christ in the sacramēt had bene true it should haue bene a thinge much belonginge to faith and the Apostolike wrytinges wold haue made vs clere and suere of it but we see that such a presence is affirmed in no one place of the scripture Therfore it is not true but it is an inuentiō of mā the which ought not to haue any place in gods thinges Now there remayneth to answer to their reasons that hold this bodely presēce of Christ in the sacrament They make as in the beginninge we haue sayde many profes and reasons but none auayleth And we will not answer but to three or foure whiche haue a certeine small shew for answeringe to these few it is an easy thinge to answer to all the other One and the first is this The first reason that is to say Chist calleth the consecrated bread his bodye and the wyne his bluod therfore it is so that the bread is his body ād the wyne his bluod that is that the bread and the wyne be turne into his bodye and bluod or at the least be there really present or els he should haue spoken a lye the which cannot be seing Christ is the vndeceaueable troth This is the greatest reason that they can make the which not withstandinge is nothinge worth yea it commeth of an ignoraunce of the maner of speche of the scripture or els if it come not of ignoraunce it procedeth of an obstinacye and self willednes because they desire to defend whether it be accordinge to the common sainge right or wronge that which ones they haue affirmed because thei wolde not seme to haue erred I answer to this reason and saye that Christ sayd the troth and could not speake an vntroth because he could not err beinge god And it is true that the bread is Christes bodye and the wyne is his bluod and I confesse it but it is true as Christ ment it not as they wold haue it Christ when he sayd this is my bodye shewinge the bread ād this is my bluod shewing the wine did not entend nor went not a bout to saye that that bread was really and substantially his bodye and the wyne his bluod but he ment to say that that bread and that wyne were a sacrament and did signifie his bodye and his bluod And he folowed the maner of the speche of the scripture when he speaketh of sacramentes you know well ynough that Christ alwayes did honoure the holye scripture alledginge it very often and prouokinge men to the same And therfore because he knew that the custome of the scripture is to name the sacraments and call them by the name of the things signified and represented by them he also desired to vse that maner of speche callinge the bread and the wyne his body and bluod because they did signifie both the one and the other that is to say he called the bread his bodye because it did signifie his bodye and the wyne his bluod because it did signifie his bluod as before S. Augustine hath sayde That the custome of the scripture is to call the sacraments by the name of the thinges signefied by them it is easelye proued and we haue alreadye sene it in the former talk The circuncisiō was a sacrament of the hebrewish people and because it was a sacrament the scripture doth call it couenaūt because it was the signe of gods couenaūt made with Abrahā and his of springe as it is written in genesis where god doth first call it the signe of the couenaunt ād after a few words he calleth it the couenaunt The couenaunt was this that god wold be the god of Abrahā ād of his seed that is to say of his of springe It is a plaine matter that the circuncision was not really this couenaunt or promesse and yet god doth call it couenaunt because it was the signe of the couenaunt should we saye that the circuncisiō was in dede gods couenaunt because god called it by this name couenaunte Sewerly no but we must say if we will saye well that therfore god calleth it so becaus the same is a signe of gods couenaunt or els of gods promesse And if ani should say what meaneth it that god did vse this maner of speche Could not he vse
the proper maner of speche and not the improper To this I answer that god often tymes vseth with vs the custome of men because we be men and he agreeth to oure maner of speche for so muche as the custome is amonge men that they call the signes of a thinge by the self same name of the same thinge signified As for example If at any tyme we should make a couenaunt or an agrement with any man as sone as the agreement and couenaunt is made we cause to be made an instrument or a wrytinge of such agrement and we call it couenaunt or els agrement not that that instrument is really such agreement for the couenaunt and agrement went before but because it is a signe of such couenaunt and agrement So we call the wrytinge of a sale or of a purchase a sale or purchase because it is a signe and confirmacion of the sale or purchase And we do call the wrytinge or the instrument of such thinges testament or legacie or gift because it is the signe and confirmacion of these thinges Let vs geue an other example which also is of the scripture In Exodus and in many other places the ceremony of the paschall lambe is called passouer And Christ and the Apostels did so call it Christ sayd in saynet luke I haue ernestly desired to eat this passouer before I suffer Here Christ called the paschall lamb passouer And the Apostells said to Christ where willt thou that we prepare for the to eat the passouer And for all that the paschall lamb was not really the passouer because the passouer as we haue in the same Exodus was that passage as it is also sayd before in the ninth reason the which the Aūgell made whē he strake the first borne of Egypt ād passed by the houses of the hebrues Now that passage was properly the passouer But because the lamb was ordeined that it should be killed and after eaten with many ceremonyes in signe and remēbraūce of that thinge therfore the scripture calleth it passouer Behold how the scripture calleth the sacramētes by the names of the thinges represented and signified why shall we maruell then that Christe did call the cōsecrated bread his body and the wyne his bluod because they should be signes and a remembraūce of his body and bluod We ought not to maruell yea it is oure great rudenes and dulnes that we see not this thinge and why he hath done it that is to saie whye he calleth the bread his body and the wyne his bluod Euery man sayth that the sacrament of thanks geuinge doth come in stede of the sacrament of the paschall lambe And if it be so seinge that the scripture and the Apostels call the same such lamb passouer yea Christ him self in the same supper when he instituted the sacrament of his body and bluod called that lambe passouer not for any other cause but for that it was a signe and a remembraunce of the passouer why should not the bread be called the body and the wyne the bluod because they be signes and a remembraunce of the bodye and the bluod euen as the lambe is called passouer because it is the signe and remembraunce of the passouer And that rock out of which came furth the water in the desert paule calleth it Christ not for any other cause but for that it did signifie Christ nor there was neauer any men that bi such a sainge wold think that paule ment to affirme that that stone was really Christ but that he ment onely to say that it did signifie Christ So likewise let vs saye of the bread and the wyne that they be called body and bluod because they be signes and a remembraunce of such thinges We haue bene longe in answeringe to this reason because in dede the whole consisteth in this declaration that we haue made The second reason is this If Christ were not really in the sacrament S. Paule wold not haue sayde that it should be condemnation to them that should take it vnworthelye nor he wold not haue sayde that such should be giltie of the lords bodye and bluod For so much as that if Christ be not in the sacrament there should not be any other thinge but bread and wyne and beinge none other thinge there it should not be to vs such condemnacion as it is in dede no condēnation to eate other comē bread and to drink other wyne To this is answered that therfore paule sayth that they be giltye of the lords body and bluod the which do take the consecrated bread and wyne and the sacrament vnworthelye not for because that eather the body or the bluod be in the sacrament but they be therfore giltye of the one and the other because thei dispise Christs death thei dispise his body and bluod not goinge with that faith and with that reuerence that they ought to take those holy signes Instituted by Christ in remembraunce of his body and bluod geuen to death for oure raunsome In old tyme thei that did dispyse or dishonoure the name or the glory of the Romane Empire thei were gyltie of treason against the state of Rome And they that had done wronge to Cesars Image or els had defaced any of Cesars writings This was as if thei had layd violent hands vpon the princes persone He that wold dishonoure the armes or the badges of any great state that prince wold haue estemed such dishonoure and disworship to be cōmitted against his oune person for when his badges or els his Armes be dyspysed he him self is dispysed So seinge that Iesus Christ the chefe prince of the world hath Instituted the sacramētall bread and wyne to the intēt that that it should be a remēbraunce of so great a thinge and should represent so great a misterye that is to say that hath geuen his body and his bluod and dyed for to deliuer vs from sinn and from euerlastinge death and to geue vs euerlastinge lyfe Sewerly they that will take these holy signes withoute true repentaunce of there sinnes and without true faith and without consideration of so great a misterie and benefite they make no counte nother of Christes body nor his bluod nor of his death no nor of Christe himself it is no maruell therfore that they who go to take such a sacrament vnworthelye do eate and drinke Iudgement that is to say condemnation because when they dispyse the signes of so great thinges they do consequently dispyse the same thinges and him also that did institute such signes It is not proued by this that Christ is enclosed in this sacrament but the contrary The third reason The third reason the which semeth to haue some shew is this that is to say that if Christ were not here in this sacrament there should not be wrought any such great myracles as men see Sometyme it is seen that the hostes haue cast out bluod and such bluod is kept in many places It
is red in the lyfe of Saint Gregorie that the consecrated bread maruelouslye chaunged into a mans finger It is red that that the brute beastes did knele doune at the presence of the thankes geuinge And somtyme there apered a childe when the host was listed vp What shall be sayde to these great myracles sewerlye if Christ were not in the sacrament god wold neauer haue wrought these great signes This reason is nothinge worth and it is like the reason that they make that defended purgatorie with saing that there was heard certaine lamentable voices of the soules of the dead which desired help of there parents or frends that they wold cause to be sayd masses and chefely those masses that be called Saint Gregories and as sone as they were sayd those voyces were heard no more It is told also in the lyfe of a certeyne seinct but in dede a fryars saincte that he saw ones a valley full of soules the which desired help and that seinct was moued to pytye of those poore soules I leaue to you to thinke how many those soules ought to be that filled that valleye when he had sayd I cannot tell how many masses because I do not well remember the storye he returned to se the vally and he found them no more there because they were delyuered out of purgatorye I do much maruell that all the soules in purgatorye went not thether into that vally that thei all might haue bene deliuered by that sainctes Masses Ergo there is a purgatorye What will the lutheranes that denye purgatorye say here what will they saie Thei that you call lutherans will sai that you be a blynde sorte of superstitious I will not sai ignoraunt Idiots of gods causes and that you haue no faith in Christe thinkinge that the materiall fier can do that to the soules that onely Christ hath done with his pretious bluod that is to saye to purge them and perfectly to satiffie gods iustice for all the sinnes of the beleuers And they will saye that you deserue to be begyled and mocked by the deuell that leadeth you to think that the soules of the dead do lament and desire masses and ye perceaue not that he is the same wicked spirite the which fayneth himself to be the soules of the dead and desireth help and caryeth aboute youre brayne and maketh you beleue that glow wormes be lanternes The soules of the dead go not a solasinge here ād there as Chrisostome vpon S. Mathew saith very well but thei abyde in there places apointed vnto thē those soules of the faithfull and godlye abyde with Christ the other abyde in there place lokinge for there finall condemnation Euen so I saye of these maner myracles thoughe thei weare in dede that thei be none other but illusions and disceyts of sathan for to geue credit to the Masse and to beinge to passe that we should not beleue sewerly in Christe And god by his iust iudgement doth suffer these disceyts because we will not receaue the knowledge of the troth nor beleue the holy gospell And for this most great sinne he will that we shall beleue lyes and be deceaued Nor sewerly we deserue none other but to receaue and allow Antichristes myracles as sainct paule sayth to the Thessalonicenses 2. Thess 2. seing that we will not stand to gods worde The holy scripture and gods worde ought without any doubt to be in much more credit with vs then as many such myracles the which in dede be all lyes yea then as many myracles althoughe they be true as can be wrought in the world The whiche worde of god doth affirme and say that Christ Iesus is in heauen Mar. 16. Luc. 24. and that from thence he shall come to Iudge the lyuing and dead and there he shall abyde Act. 3. as peter sayth in the Acts of the Apostels vntill the tyme of the restitution of all thinges and it maketh vs likewise to vnderstand that the sacramentes be signes and be not the thinges signified let vs take hede and geue credit to these thinges that be clere and plaine If we will not be disceaued and not to the opiniōs and phantasies of mē which be not founde in the scripture but be clerely against them the fourthe reason They make another reason the which I wold haue sayd nothinge of because it is allready answered yet for so much as they bringein with the same certeine examples or similitudes to geue a coloure to their opinion of the which we haue not yet spoken we will saie of them a few words to the greather and more plentifull clerenes of the truthe They saye that god can bringe it to passe that is to saie that whole Christ great ād thick as he was on the Crosse should be in the sacramēt and that he should be whole in euery parte of the same as the soule is whole in the whole bodye and whole in euery parte of the bodye and that he should be as man in many places in heuen on earth vpon all altares and in euery other place where the sacrament of thanks geuinge is He can turne one body into another as shall seme good and lik him because he is almighty then he can make that the bread shal be turned into his bodye and the wyne into his bluod Seing he could create the world of nothinge he can much easelyer chaunge one thinge into another They geue eyample of Moyses rodd the which was turned into a serpent and then the serpent was turned againe into the rod likewise the waters of Egypt were turned into bluod Concerninge the being of whole Christ in the sacrament as great and thick as he is in heauen they geue the similitude of the heauen which we see the which being so great is not withstandinge whole in oure litle eye Likewise oure whole face apereth in a glasse that is much lesse then the face is yea the whole man is seen in a litle glasse Concerning the being of whole Christ in euery parte of the sacrament they gyue the similitude of oure soule as we haue already sayd the which is whole in the whole and whole in euery parte of the body Oure face also is whole in the whole glasse and whole in euery parte of the glasse after this sorte that is to saye that if the glasse should be broken in many partes oure whole face wold apere in euery one of them Concerning Christes bodely beinge in many places that is to say in heauen on the earth and in euery place where the sacrament is they geue the similitude of a man the which should haue about him many glasses in euery one of these glasses the forme of a man will apere Likwise if one speak in the presence of many persons his voice is but one and yet it is whole in dyuers mens eares If nature bringe this to passe that is to saye that one thinge may be in dyuers places much more Christ who
hād of god vnderstand you the thinges aboue and not the earthly thinges And shose men do the contrary for they drawe vs doune alow and to the earth sainge that Christ in the litle closeth and in the litle holes when we should haue oure conuersation aboue and in heauen and that we might saye with paule Oure conuersation is in heauen from whence we loke for oure lord Iesus Christ who shall chaunge oure wretched bodyes and shall make them lyke to his glorious bodye We think yea we be certayne that thus farr we haue playnely proued and shewed manye wayes that Christ Iesus is not bodelye in the sacrament of thankes geuinge or the lords supper as paule calleth it and that there is muche lesse made in the same anye substantiall turninge of the bread and the wyne into his body and bluod And we haue made it apere that the opinions whiche affirme such thinges be false ād erroneous There remayneth now in the end to see who were the auctoures of those strainge and phantasticall Imaginations and wherby they were moued to fynde them oute seinge they be withoute all reason and contrarye to Christes mynd and the whole holy scripture I haue not yet heatherto bene hable to know whan this opinion of the reall and bodely being of Iesus Christe in the sacrament did beginne It apereth that aboute the yere of oure lorde 877. or about the tyme of pope Iohn the eight or a litle before men began to dispute about that matter Iohn scotus an Englishe man not he that was called sottell but another more auntiēt and wery worthye in lerninge who florished in fraunce vnder Charles surnamed balde made a boke against this new opinion of the sacrament whose Iudgement shortly after Beringarius of the coūtrye of Turonne and deacon of Aungee followed a mā of singular lerninge ād of holy lyfe who dealt all his goods to the poure and lyued by the labour of his hādes as Platina writeth in the lyfe of Pope Iohn the fiftenth But one lanfranck of pauia bishop of Canterbery in England so much preuayled with his auctoritie with Pope Leo the nynth and so much persuaded him that in the councell of vercels he caused the sayd Ihon scotusses boke and berengarionses opinion who followed him to be condemned And it was ordeined in that councell that men ought to beleue not onely Christes presence in the sacrament but the turning of the bread and the wyne into his body and bluod And this was as Mat. palmerius and Iohn lucidus Samothenus in the amendements of the tymes saye in the yere of the lord 1052. so that it is now iust 500. yeares sence this new opinion of the turninge of the substāces of the bread and the wyne into Christes bodye and bluod was first determined Beringarius opinion of the sacrament the which was condēned as lanfrāck setteth it out in his booke made against him is this The sacrifice of the church is mad of 2. things of the seeable and of the vnseeable that is to say of the sacrament and of the thing of the sacrament The which thing not withstanding that is to say the body of Christ if it were before mens eyes it should be seeable but it is lifted vntill the tymes of the restitutiōs of all thinges vp into heauen and sitting on the right hand of the father can not be called back from heauen as thapostell peter wryteth be cause that the parson of Christ hath his being of god and of man but the sacrament of the lords table is made of bread and of wyne the which things consecrated be not turned but abyde in their substances hauing lykelynes with those things whereof thei be a sacramēt This true and godly opynyon of Beringarius the which as we haue sayd before ◅s the opinion of the old church and is taken out of the holy scripture was condemned in the forsayd councell of ve◅selles And afterward a nother tyme in Rome by pope Nicholas the second who compelled Beringarius to recant and make a beastly and shamefull confession contrary to his own true confession Beringarius recantation is put in the decree of consecration the .ij. distinction capite Ego beringarius where he confesseth and affirmeth that he beleueth with the church of Rome that the bread and the wyne which be set on thaltare be not onely a sacrament but also they be the true body and bluod of our lord Iesus Christ and that he is not only in the sacramēt but also in trowth sensually handled with the priestes handes and is brokē in peces ād with the teeth of the faithfull is gnawed in to morsels Doo ye think that this was a godly confession that they compelled this holy man Beringarius to make the which confesseth that Christ is in deede sensibly handeled that is to say towched and broken with the priestes handes and than after This host was such one as beleued all things that he is knawed in to morsels with the teeth of the faythfull Me thinketh that this confession is like vnto that bost of Bachanus that beleued to moch as it is said The gloser of the decree to whom such a maner of confession semed strange and crewel saw this well ynough and therfor he sayth if thow dowst not after a safe sort vnderstād Beringarius words thou shalt fall into a greatter heresy than that which he had The master of the sentences in the fourth the .xij. distinction myndy◅g to glose the words of the same confession sayth that the same to be sensibly handled may be referred both to th one and thother that is to say to the body and to the sacrament of the body But the same to be broken in peeces and to be knawed into morsels can not be said but of the sacrament only A good glose that speaketh contrary to the text This glose hath .ij. faultes First it speaketh against the auctor that is to say against the master of the sentences him self who geueth it because he will that Christ shuld be in the sacrament vndyuydably whole in the whole and whole in euery part of the sacrament If it be soo how can he be towched and handled with the priestes handes For somoch as that the thing which is handled is felt with the hādes and if it be felt it must nedes be hote or cold moist or drie hard or soft rough or smoth who did euer touch Christes body syns it ascended into heauen and dyd euer feele it whether it were whote could or of what qualytie it should be If the master of the sentences had said that the withcommes of the bread and the wyne be handled with handes he had sayd true according to his opynion because that the greatnes of the bread and the withcommes of it may be felt with handes but the withcommes of Christes body can not be felt Therfor Christes body can not be handled with the priestes handes Further if Christs body in the sacrament may be handled
with handes why should it not be seene It is playne that euery thing that is felt may also be seene if it be not a thorow shewer as the ayer is But who did eauer see Christ in the sacrament Thother fault of thesame glose is that it speaketh against the text For the text of beringarius confession sayth expresly that not only the sacrament but Christs body and bluod be sensibly handled with the priestes handes be broken and knawed to morsels with the teeth of the faithfull These wordes cannot haue that sense that the master of the sentences geueth them because that the body and the bluod be playnely spoken of and he sayth in the text that they be broken and gnawed into morsels with the faythfuls teeth Further it is not to be thought that they who were present at that confession did vnderstand the wordes otherwise theÌ„ according to the open and lettered signification For so moch as that in confessions men must chefelye speake playnely and not in such sort as it should be necessary to gyue them gloses and expositions but thei ought to be opeÌ„ and many fast and farr from any doubt And so moch the more as they that compelled him to make that confession did wirt it them selues as it lyked theÌ„ It is sayd that a certen maÌ„ called Humbertus cardinall of burgony worded or if you will so call it framed that confessioÌ„ O Capernites This is the honor that thei did to Christ to constraine a poore maÌ„ to confesse that Christ who is immortall and vnsufferable should be sensibly handled and broken with the priestes handes and chawed and gnaued into morsels with the teeth of the faithfull Be these the councels gathered together in the holy gost Let the master of the sentences for all that and as many other glosers aâ—… be in the world glose at their pleasure yet thei shall neuer sett the matter well together This thing is to doltish yea it is a skorning both of the sacrament and of Christ him self what the causes should be that haue moued the deuysers of these opinyons of Christes bodyly presence in the sacrament and of the turning of the bread and the wyne into Christes body and bluod to Imagin such things I say in my Iudgsment that they be chefely .ij. The first is the ignorance of the maners of speach of the holy scripture because they were not exercysed in the same and they did imagen when Christ sayd this is my body shewing the bread And this is my bluod shewing the wyne that such a maner of speach cold not be true except that bread and that wyne were substantially and beingly the very body aÌ„d the very bluod of Christ or at the least that the one and thother that is to saie Christes body and bluod were with in the sacrameÌ„t Thei sawe that the words were clere and on the other side also that the old doctours many tymes did affirme and call the breade and the wyne body and bluod they thought that that was the mynd as well of the same doctor as of the holy scripture the which thing notwithstanding was neuer so And thei considered not that the same scripture whan it treateth of sacrameÌ„ts is woÌ„t to speak after that sort that is to say to call the sacraments by the name of the things signified as allredy we haue beforcerteÌ„ tymes told aÌ„d that the doctors likwyse folow the same maner of speach this I think is one cause why thei did so vtter it And to proue this true whaÌ„ thei goo about to proue their purpose thei alledge the saings of the doctors euel vnderstaÌ„d aÌ„d those words of Christ This is my body shewing the bread aÌ„d this is my bluod shewing the wine as though he had meÌ„t to sai that the substaÌ„ces of the bread aÌ„d wyne shuld be turned into his body aÌ„d bluod Not coÌ„sidering that Christ speake as the scripture is wont to speak whaÌ„ it calleth the sacrameÌ„ts by the name of the things signified And therfor thei haue affirmed those their opinioÌ„s to be thiÌ„gs ê‘taining to faith the which euery one should be buÌ„d to beleue as an article of the faith The foresaid laÌ„fraÌ„ck in his boke of the sacrameÌ„t the which he wrote against Beringarius saith we beleue saith he that the earthly substaÌ„ces the which vpon the lordes table be by the priestly ministery deuinelie hallowed by the heaueÌ„ly powr be vnspeakably vncoÌ„ceiuably aÌ„d meruelously turned in the veri essens or beiÌ„gnes of the lords body the formes of the same things and certeÌ„ other qualyâ—…ies being reserued And he saith also that the iust maÌ„ who lyueth by faith doth not labor to serchout with arguments and to vnderstaÌ„d with reson after what sort the bread is made flesh aÌ„d the wyne is turned in to bluod beingly the nature of the one and the other being changed because he will rather gyue faith to the heauenly my steryes to th entent that hereafter he might come to the rewards of faith then leauing the fayth to be toyled in vayne in conprehending those things that cannot be comprehended c. Thomas of aquyne in his hymne of the sacrameÌ„t of the lords body aÌ„d bluod sayth the lyke that is to saie the word flesh that is to sai the sonn of god made man with the word doth make bread flesh and the wyne is made Christes bluod and though the sense doo fayle to establish a pure hart yet faith only is sufficient And next after he sayth let him put to faith as a help for the fayling of the senses These .ij. men wold that opinion should be beleued as an article of the faith but if they haue beleued it as an article of the faith aÌ„d as their wordes doo affirme surely they haue slyghtly and euel fauordly beleued because that nothing ought to be beleued as an artycle of the faith except it be found expressely in the scripture Let them tell me then where is the scripture that they alledge Where is gods word on which they grownd their faith Should we beleue these doctours that make thearticles of the faith without gods word that bilde their bilding vpon the sand and not vpoÌ„ the sure rock The first cause I say of such opynions was the ignorance of the holy scripture The second cause without comparayson is moch wors than this And parauenture it shall appeare to some that I am of an euell mynd thinking so moch euel as I doo of the auctours of such opinions But if thei will consider the disceightes the craftes and the nomber of abuses that be malytiously committed in the masse thei will sai surely that I am yet to gentle that I think not moch wors What good caÌ„ be thought of the beginning of so great an error from whens doth procede so many inconueniences and disorders The second cause I say that I imagine is this that is to saie that thei desired to gyue credite to the priuate masse that is to say to
that masse where he that saith it onely taketh the sacrament and doth not deale it to the people We must vnderstand that in old tyme the masse was not said as it is now said as before we haue noted in the bocke of the Anatomy for so moch as that the masse then was no nother but the ceremony of the lords supê‘ the which was dealt to the church and the mynyster did not take it alone as hath bene vsed froÌ„ certeÌ„ hondreth yeares hetherto against Christes expresse ordynaÌ„ce aÌ„d coÌ„maundement who sayd whan he did institute the sacrament that thei should take it and dyuide it amoÌ„g theÌ„ and not that one alone should receue it Thei sawe that this mass was that wych made theÌ„ rych aÌ„d mighty It multiplied the churches reuenewes aÌ„d in th end it made theÌ„ lyue in delytes as before in the boke of the anatomy in the chapter of the abuses of the masse we haue sayd And for to wyne theÌ„ credite and bring to passe that the people should be inclined to theÌ„ and shuld haue deuocioÌ„ to theÌ„ there could not be found a thing more to the purpose then to geue men to vnderstand and make the comoÌ„ sort beleue that Christ shuld be in the sacrameÌ„t and that there shuld be made a turning of the substances of the bread aÌ„d the wyne into his body and bluod and to saie that there be so many myracles and to make the thing so great and wonderfull Thei were sure that if the people were persuaded that Christ were not in the sacrament but that there were only the bread and the wyne as holy signes thei wold haue cared littell for it nor they wold neuer haue beleued that the masse shuld haue so many vertues as thei haue geueÌ„ to vnderstand And thei should not haue had that vnmesurable gaine ther shuld not haue bene drawen out of that golden well thoes infinite richesses Let euery man that hath reason and is without affection consider aÌ„d he shal find as much as I sai to be true This is a sure rule if the people did not beleue Christ to be in the sacrament and were not I meane the people bewitched with some straÌ„ge Imagination that thei wold make lytle count of the masse The popes that sawe this goodlye inuention to be moch for their purpose thei after did not only with their decrees and coÌ„cels allowe it but they did bynd the Christian people beleue it as an article of the faith I haue spokeÌ„ of the first dyuisers of these opinions what causes I thinck did moue theÌ„ to seke owt so strange Imaginations and so farr from the trouth Of the other that folowed next after that is to say of the scholemen I doo not sai soo As for example of one Thomas of Aquine of BonauaÌ„ture of Egidus Romanus and such lyke as were questionistes without noumber and haue dysputed endleslie on the master of the sentences and thereby intangled the world I think well that the first cause that is to say the ignorance of the scripture did seduce them to beleue thus because they did attend more to the wordly knowleges and to the bookes of phylosophy then to the holy scripture But I doo not beleue that any such malyce did moue them as moued those first inueÌ„ters It is true in deede that a nother ignorance made them to erre that is to say that when they sawe that the pope and the councels had so determined thei Imagined that they were tyed and bound to beleue all that that thei had appointed and ordeyned to be beleued of all the faithfull And therfor thei haue affirmed this opinioÌ„ as an article of the faith thinking they should haue bene heretikes if they should haue holden any other wyse And to proue this true certen of them and among the rest Thomas of argeÌ„tyne the heremyte in the fourth the .xi. distinction saye that before the article of the turnkeÌ„ding was determyned by the church It was no heresy to sai the contrary that is to sai that the bread and wyne remayne after the consecration This is that which deceyued them the popes auctorytye whom they thought was Christes lefetenant and that euery thing that the see Apostolyke and those councels determyned was an oracle against the which it was not lawfull to speake the poore soules not vnderstanding that no man is bound in matters perteyning to faith to beleue eyther pope or councles but so farr as gods word speaketh from the which if they swarue though there should come an angel from heauen we should not be bound yea I say we ought not to beleue him as paul sayth writing to the galat. And if we haue particular reuerence to any councels Gala. 1. it is because that in their determinacions they agree with the holy scripture which ought to be the paterne aÌ„d the rule to all the meÌ„ in the world And therfor we haue in specyall worshyp those .iiij. councels that is to say the councel of Nece in the which the error of Arrius was destroyed the councel of ConstaÌ„tinople gathered together against Eunomius and Macedonius the first councel of Ephesus where Nestorius was iudged aÌ„d condeÌ„ned the couÌ„cel of CalcedoÌ„ in the which the wickednes of Eutyches and dyostorus and certen other were reproued because thei haue not spokeÌ„ nor determined any further then is conteined in the holy scriptures But if that men let them be of what so euer knowlege holynes and auctoritie ye will shall not bring furth in gods things the holy scripture we ought not to beleue theÌ„ nor all the whole world to gether can not make a man to beleue a thing as an article of the faith except it be conteyned in the holy scripture A short rehersall It is tyme now that we knyt vp the some of this present sermon in the which this article that is whether Christ be really and bodyly in the sacrament of thanks geuing or no is largely examyned And first we haue sene how there be in this article .ij. principall IudgemeÌ„ts or opinions The first saith that Christ in body and in soule great and thick as he is presently in heauen is whole in the sacrameÌ„t And this opinion is diuided into ij For some say that not only Christ is in the sacrament but that the substance of the bread and wyne be turned into his body and bluod and that there remaineth no more eyther bread or wyne but the only withcoÌ„mes of the one and the other Some other sai that Christ is really in the sacrament but the substances of the bread and wyne remayne and that there is made no turning in them And we haue seene the obiections where vpon this their fantasy is ground-wrought TheÌ„ next we haue put the secoÌ„d opinioÌ„ the which we hold and sure beleue is catholik and godly and it is this that is to sai that the substances of the bread aÌ„d wyne doo not only remaine in the sacrament but Christ is
not there bodyly preseÌ„t of any maner of sort but as maÌ„ he is onelie in heauen where he sitteth on the right haÌ„d of the father froÌ„ whence he shall come to Iudge the liuinge aÌ„d the deade The first reason as tharticle of our faith doth sai And this opinion we haue proued with many reasons First by the definition of a sacrament the which is none other but a signe of an holy thing and it is not nedefull for to be a sacrament that Christ should be really as man in the same and moch lesse that there should be made any substantiall turning of the bread and the wyne It suffiseth that the bread and the wyne be there as signes of his body and bluod The 2. reason Then next seinge that this sacrament was instituted only for remembrance it suffiseth that it doo bring vs in remembrance of Christs body and bluod geueÌ„ for our raunsominge And it nedeth not to put there the bodyly presence of th one or of thother for so moch as that the right of no sacrament either in generall or particular requireth thys c. The third seing the spirituall eating of Christ is only profitable and not the bodyly The 3. reasoÌ„ If Christ were as man in the sacrameÌ„t he should help nothing The turnekindinge of the bread and wyne into Christes body and bluod The. 4. re cannot stand together with certen playne and many fest effects which be sene that is to say with the noryshing because the sacrameÌ„t doth norish as other bread and wyne doth and with thingenderyng of certen beasts as magots or such like beastes the which things cannot be made admitting this turnkynding of the bread and the wyne in to Christes body and bluod The fift if any such thing were god with out any maner of nede shuld work some The fift reason yea many most stonishfull myracles such as was neuer the greater The syxt it should not be necessary that Christ on the day of iudgement should come down froÌ„ heauen The syxt reason but that he shuld stepp out of the sacrament seing he is here moch nerer on earth then in heauen The seuenth The seuenth reason the opinion of Christs bodyly presence in the sacrament dymynisheth the truth of his body and maketh it phantasticall yea nothingeth it The eyght The eyght reason The sursâ—â—m corda which is song in the masse geueth to vnderstand that in old tyme Christs bodyly presence in the sacrament was not beleued The nynth The nynth reason If forbecause Christ sayd this is my body shewing the bread and thit is my bluod shewing the wyne the bread and the wyne shuld be turned into his body and bluod or els that the body and bluod shuld be there present seing there be many other speaches in the scripture like vnto this it shuld be behoue full that the lyke shuld be done in all those from whens wold folow many inconueniences The tenth reason The tenth seing that Christes flesh can not be eaten nor his bluod droken but after .ij. sortes that is to say spiritually by fayth and sacramentally And this may be done without the bodyly presence 1. Chor. 10. as the auncients did eate and drink him before that he toke mans fleshe as paul saith wryting to the Chorynthyes there is therfor no necessytie to affirme that bodyly presence in the sacrament Then further all though that we shuld bringe forth no reason for vs it belongeth not to vs to proue our negatiue but it belongeth to them that affirme such a being there to proue their affirmatiue the which thei did neuer nor can not doo by any saing of the scripture We haue after also made appeare that our oppinion is of thold church and chefely Augustines And we haue answered to the obiections of the contrary opinion making it apparant that they be vneffectuall vnpithye and weak to proue their purpose declaring the maners of speach that the scripture vseth when it treateth of the sacraments In the end we haue added from when the false ImaginatioÌ„ of that maner error is proceded And we haue bene long in treating of this article and we haue made many moo wordes than we thought and haue repeated the self things often and haue somthing exceded the measure of a sermon for the which thing the readers shall haue me excused We haue coÌ„sidered first that the thing was most wayghty and worthy to be well expressed the which could not be done with few wordes Then further also the error was so coÌ„firmed and after such sort rooted in the myndes of the people that it could not be pluckt vp nor rooted out without as it is comonly said moch digging and deluing And therfor it was necessary for vs to be long and parauenture somthing tedious to the lerned neuertheles this labor is chefely taken for the vnlerned Well it suffiseth that this our purpose was vpright and that we toke not vpoÌ„ vs this entreprise for no nother end but for gods honor and for the loue and defence of the truth And last of all to doo good and help to the simple Christians who haue bene so long tyme drowned in so great an error and deceiued by the suttle and wicked Antichrist WhoÌ„ let vs all praye vnto god with a good hart aÌ„d continually that he will so roote owt and plucck vp or to speak better destroie sauing allwayes not withstanding the men to whoÌ„ we desire all good I sai euen destroie as the lytle stone did that great Image which Nabuchodonosor sawe in his dreame that is to sai that he will make him vtterly vanysh away and be come nothing to the entent that gods finall aÌ„d perfite kingdome mai come thorow Christ Iesus his son our lord and redemer to whoÌ„ be honor and glory world without ende Amen FINIS Faults escaped in the printing and corrected after this sort Take lea for the leafe A for the first side B for the secoÌ„de side Ly. for the lyne R for read Lea. 2. b. ly 8. headolugnes r headlongnes Lea. 4. a. ly 21 opinious r. opinions lea 6. b. ly 1. ehyrch r. church lea 9. b. ly 18. strst first Lea. 12 b ly 1 euy r any lea 11 b. ly 20 Hollis r. holies lea 21 a ly 2. vpistle r epistle 6. ly 13 soruant r seruant lea 25 b ly 13 and the blud r and the winne the bluod lea 35 b. ly 20 glorios r. gloriousnes lea 36 a ly 11. tedyosnes r. tediousnes lea 40 b. ly 8. ho r hoc lea 42 a. ly 26. poinctt r poinct b. ly 20. coÌ„secrationi r. consecration lea 49 a. ly 24 ony r any lea 54 b. ly 16. wat. r. was lea 60. a. ly 8 mades r. made and for CoÌ„secrauyon r. coÌ„secration lea 65 a ly 16. no r. not ly 25. superstitos r. superstitious Lea. 67. a ly 18. tho r. to lea 68 a li. 5. thert r. there l. 17. fom r from lea 74. a. ly 16 byleuers r beleuers and all waies after lea 72 a. ly 10 he fore r. before lea 77 a li. 19. candache r candace lea 81. b. ly 26. crimin crimine lea 88. a. ly 21 offied r offered lea 94 b ly 12. passhion r passion lea 111. b 21. except r except lea 115 a li 1 song r soung ly 2. rong r roung lea a li. 2. misfortutune r. misfortune lea 118 b ly 11. apostos r. apostles Lea. 120. ly r. super r. supper lea 121. b. ly 22 Now he he r Now. he lea 122 a ly 19 parauentur r. perauenture le 124. a li. 12. thes r. those lea 125 b ly 13. the chefe greatest miste ry r the cheefe mystery lea 126. a. li. 15. the lawe I speak r the lawe Nor there is no sinn but that is against gods lawe but gods law I speake lea 126. b. ly 7. haue heuier sinnes than r haue heuior sinnes then mans laughter then lea 127 a li. 5. Idolatros r Idolatrous li. 9. thcik r thicke li 13. in them r in it lea 127 b ly 8 benefice r benefite lea 128. a. ly 18 ame r. same Lea. 131. a. li. 19. saint or saintes r saint or sainctess ly 20 S. loreto r loreto b ly 6 say here willâ—â— say here be these Idolatreis how can thei de â—…ey it will Lea. 131. b. ly 9 Hiperdulia r Hyperdulia lea 137 a li. 5. wis r. with lea 138. a. li. 13 folow done a nother r folowed one an other lea 156 a li. 22. and and. r. and. lea 174. b. ly 19. mas r masse lea 177. a. li. 7. couered with r. couered wear couered with b. ly 1. crafft r. craft and lykewise in other places lea 178 a. li. 14 eschew r. issue and generally read for off of for thos those for thes these for couerid couered and for such other in vid read coÌ„meÌ„ly ved and often for ans or ens read ance or ence as for importans read importance and for reuerens reuerence and often for or read our as for sauior read sauiour and for byleuers allways beleuers and commenly for os read ous or ose as the word geueth as for gratios read gratious and for purpos read purpose Lea. 180. a. l. 8 yoie r. ioy 182. b. ly 15 trewe faults in the sermom read true and 185. b. li. 9. who euer read whosoeuer 186. a. li. 15. remembrans read remembraunce and after 187. a. ly 18. substans read substance 188. b. li. 5. body lithere read bodyly there 192. a. li. 7. dewe read due 193. a. il 3. euerlasting read euerlasting 193. b. li. 17. be beleweth read beleueth 194. b. li. 15. seane read seene 196. b. l. 14 blode r. bluod 199. b. l. 3. satisfing r satisfiing 205. a. l. 25. wheÌ„ should r. when thei should 222. b. l. 1. turne read turned and 228. a. li. â—… beinge r. bringe 225. b. li. 5. shose r. those FINIS
of the trueth they condemne them they imprison them they torment them and in the ende they kill theÌ„ And what is this but to shew plainely to the whole worlde that they be raueninge wolues and not shepherdes of Christs flock yea that they be very antichristes And the worshipfull inquisitours what els be they but antichristes Catchpoules creweller theÌ„ Neroes so that it were better to fall into the hands of Turks and Mores without comparison then into thers Besyde that they are vtterly ignorant of the holy scripture they are skilled in none other learning but in the skotish and sophisticall mouldines And these as you see are appointed to order the matters of oure faith and in there handes are the goods the honoure and the lyues of poore soules whom miserably they put to death by pretence of the faith although they be enemies of it and of all godlines I am desyrous to make this discours to open there eies Which fault not by maâ—…ice but by ignoraÌ„ce and to make them vnderstand that they should not maruell that I reproue the Masse and the Masse booke saing that they be full of falshod abuses aÌ„d many other errours as it may plainly be sene in this present booke Wherfore I deâ—…yre for the dere loue of Iesus Christ all the louers of the trueth and those that teÌ„der godlines to read â—…nd well consider this my labour for without â—…oubt they shall fynde trew that I say Praye to â—…od for me God be with yow THE TABLE The Table of the matters contained in this present book which we haue deuided in IIII. partes 1. The first parte examineth the Masse from the beginning that is from these words Introibo ad altare Dei vnto that parte which they call the Cannon when the Sanctus is said 2. The second examineth the Cannon it self the which they make the most holy and principall parte of the Masse and is said altogether in secret 3. The third examineth all the rest from the end of the Cannon beginning at these words Per omnia saecula saeculorum which goeth before the Pater noster vnto the end of the Masse 4. The fourth examineth the abuses and the superstitions that be in the same Masse coÌ„cluding after in the end that no Christian ought to be present at it but that it ought to be eschewed of all men as the plage The first parte is deuyded into foure chapters 1. The first saith that the introibo is false and a superstition 2. That the ConfÃteor is not Christian because it maketh no mention of Iesus Christ. 3. The two prayers that are said softly when he goeth to the aulter the one is false and the other is very wicked aÌ„d lesseneth the honour of Iesus Christ The second Chapter 1. Examineth the Kyrie eleison and the Gloria in excelsis Deo 2. It declareth that many praiers said after the Gloria in excelsis Deo are wicked and â—…gainst the plaine word of God 3. It declareth that the epistle and the gospell and â—…enerally all Gods word are vnworthely and euell â—…auoredly handled in the Masse The third chapter 1. Declareth that the praier which is sayd in the â—…ffering of the bread or as they say of the host is 2. That the mixting of water with wyne wicked 〈◊〉 an inueÌ„tion of meÌ„ which ought not to haue plaâ—â— among holly thyngs 3. That the praier at the offering of the Cupp is â—…icked as that is of thost The fourth Chapter 1. That many praiers which they call secreats and are sayd before the preface hold in them these wickednesses that is to say 2. That fasting doth purge sinns and make 〈◊〉 Worthy of the grace of god and leadeth vs to thâ—… heauenly glory 3. That by the bread and Wine not yet consecrâ—…ted God is apeased toward vs. Te second parte vuhich is deuided into foure chapters 1. The first axamineth the thre first parts of thâ—… Cannon That is Te igitur the memeâ—…to of the liuinge and the CommunicaÌ„teâ—… The second chapter 1. Examineth the fourth aÌ„d first parte of the saâ—… Cannon that is Hanc igitur oblationem and Quam oblationem 2. It examineth the sixt and seauenth parte that Qui pridie quam pateretur and tâ—â— Simili modo postquam coenatuâ—… est which be parts of the Consecration The third chapter 1. Examineth the eight parte of the Cannon aâ—… â—…heweth that he who saith the Masse vsurpeth that office which is onely Christs 2. That he saith a most wicked praier the which wrongeth Christ. The fourth chapter 1. It examineth the nynth parte which is most wicked and praieth that the Aungels may beare â—…he body and blud of Christ into heauen before the â—…ace of god 2. It examineth the tenht parte of the Cannon â—…he which is folish and gaine saieth itself 3. It examineth the eleauenth and last parte of the Cannon The third parte vvhich is deuyded in to foure chapters 1. The first sheweth that the saing of the prayers in secret and the desyre that amen shuld be answered by him that vnderstandeth not the prayer as it is in the Masse is a foolish thing and without any reason and against S. Paules saing 2. That the prayers which they say after the Pater noster that is to say the libera nos quaesumus is with out reason said in secret 3. That the breaking of the host and making thre parts of it and the mingling one of those parts with the wyne is vnfitt The second chapter 1. Declareth how deuout and holy the thre praieâ—… sayd Inmediatly after Agnus Dei be and thâ—… Domine non sum dignus which is saâ—… thryse and the praier concerning the host and tâ—… cup and the two praiers that follow 2. That the last praiers which are said in the eâ—… of the Masse be most wicked because they geueâ—… to the sacrameÌ„t that office which is onely Christ â–ª 3. And certein other prayers doe gainsay the prâ—…uat Mass 1. The third chapter of the Masse for the dead 2. Declareth that the first praier is folish aÌ„d to 〈◊〉 purpose because it asketh that it ought not to asâ—… 3. That the Epistle taken out of the Apocalipâ—… gainsaith the strst prayer aÌ„d the whole Masse thâ—… praieth for the dead 4. The words of the books of the Machabees arâ—… examined That the offertory is foÌ„d aÌ„d an incoÌ„uenieÌ„t requeâ—… Te fourth chapter of the blessings 1. Declareth that the blessing of the ashes is blasphemy because it geueth to ashes the raunsom of sinn and likewise all the other blessings as of Candels of palmes of fyer of frankincense of the pascall of chese of eggs of bread of water and to be â—…hort of the popes Agnus Dei they are all wicked and full of superstition because they geue â—…o much to the bodyly things The fourth parte of the book is of the abuses of the Masse and is deuided into 6. chapters 1. In the first that it is a great errour that the Masse should
In the cries ād in the work And for the iij. times before the lawe that is to say from Adam to Noe frō Noe to Abrahā frō Abraham to Moyses So that this our master Durant allegeth as many significations of thes iij. crosses as there are threfoldnessis or nombers of thre Imagined Behold now the great misteries of this Canon Moreouer who hath auctorised him that made this Canon to giue so many significacions to thes crosses Is it in mans powr to doo it Thes things to him that vnderstandeth are supersticious and vnknowen not only of the Apostles but also of the primatiue and puer church I could if I wold touch that matter how that bread and that wine not yet consecrated could be sacrifices which are offered for the whole church and for all the faithfull but of this matter we will speake more here affter when we will proue Yea that the bread and wine consecrated that is to say whan thei be a sacrament are no sacrifyces but only a memory of the trew sacrifice thei be so muche lesse sacrifices whan as yet thei be not a sacrament that is to say not yet consecrated as we shall further declare The second part of the canō is the momento which is a prayer that is made for the liuing and it is this Lord remember thy seruants men and wemen And in this place praier is made for certen particular parsons as semeth good to hym that sayth the masse and affter he addeth And all the bowt standers whos faith is plaine vnto the and their deuocion knowen For whom we offer vnto the or els they offer vnto the this sacrifice of praise for thē selues and for all theirs for redempcion of their sowles for the hope of helth and for their safetie And thei yeld vp their vowes vnto the eternal liuing and trewe god In this memento ther is nothing but may be easily vnderstand Here he that sayth the masse affirmeth that that same bread and wyne which are not yet consecrate but bare bread and wine are offered to god for the redempcion of their sowles of whom memory is made and also of the about standers This speach doth a base Christ because it semeth that Christ shuld not haue redemed thos sowles as withowt dowt he hath done And he first promysed it and all the scriptures affirme Math. 20 Heb. 9. that he nedeth no more to doo it Paul to the hebrewes sayth that Christ hath fownd owt the euerlasting redempcion In the Apocalipse Iohn saith Apoca. 5. Thow hast redemed vs in thy blood and speaketh to Christ of euery tribe tong people ād nacion And hast made vs vnto our god kings and priestes And how many saings iff we wold and also nede were could we bring forth But it nedeth not in so plaine a matter to alledge moo witnessis Shuld we confesse as this praier doth that with breade and wine is made the redempcion of our sowles Christ only is our redemer and not the bread nor the wine vnconsecrated no nor when they be consecrated as thei call it But let vs admitt that thei were consecrated which not with stonding thei be not and that Christ were with vs bodily in parson yet it shuld not nede any more to offer him for the redempcion of our sowles because he hym selff hath done that withowt vs and hath offered hym selff ones for euer to bring that to passe What nedeth it than any more to offer him for that purpos Ought we not to beleue that our redempcion is made withowt seking who shuld make it againe as though it were not made Therfor this memento is wicked The third part of the canon is a praier in this forme Cōmunicating and honoring the memory of the gloryous and cōtinuall virgin Mary mother of god ād of our lord Iesus Christ ād of the blessed Apostels and Martyrs Peter and Paul Andrew The euelnes of the latin proueth him vnlearned in the latin tonge that made it Iames and Ihon Thomas Iames Philip Bartilmew Simon ād Thadeus Linus Cletus Clement Sixtus Cornelius Cyprian Lawrence Grisoganus Iohn and Paul Cosmyan and Damyan and of all thy sainctes for whos desertis and prayers grant vs that we may with the help of thy defence be strengthened in all thinges by the same Christ our lord Amen It is said that Siritius the pope did add thes wordes In which is celebrated the rememberans of the gloryos mother and Virgin and of the other sainctes here named But why there shuld be made memory of thos rather than of many other he that hath made this Communicantes ought to tell it It is destered that by owre communicating with the saintes and by partaking of their good things and by honoring the memory of them that god thorow their merites wold grant vs in all things to be strengthned with his help In this parte also there is nothing has is not easyly vnderstand And why he doth ◅ere suppose that the saincts pray for vs which ◅s not fownd by the holy scripture we shuld ◅alke a litle on this matter but at this time we will attend to that which is of more waight And we wil leaue this till a nother time to auoide tedyosnes to the reader THE II. CHAPTER The iiij and v. part of the canon is examined that is Hanc igitur oblationē and Quā oblationē It examineth also the vi and vij part which is Qui pridie ād simili modo where mē may plainly see that the defenders of the masse know not what Consecracion is no nor with what wordes nor whanit is made The iiij part of the canō is this that is to say We besech the therfor o lord that thow wilt accept or take this oblaciō of our seruice and of all thy howsold and that thow woldest dispose our dayes in thy peace and command that we may be freed from euerlasting damnacion and be nombred among the flock of thine elect thorow Iesus Christ our lord Amen Te fifft part is this that is to say The which oblacion o god we besech the vouchsaue in all things to make blessed auctorissed reasonable and acceptable so that to vs it may be made the body and blood of thy very welbeloued sonn our lord Iesus Christ And saing thes wordes there are made v. crosses the first but ouer the breade only and the last ouer the cupp only the other iij. ouer the bread and the cupp together Master durant reciteth diuers exposicions of thes words benedictā ascriptā ratā ratio nabilē ād acceptabilē ād of thes crosses and findeth owt certen other trines or threes diuers from them that he hath taught before But what neded it to institute so many crosses and supersticious doings as things necessary whan Christ hath not commanded them nor his apostels nor were neauer vsed by the primatiue church The apostle paule not being so bold to ordein the sacrament otherwyse than as Christ had taught him that he had done
of the altare the most holy body and blood of thy sonn may be fullfilled with euery heuenly blessing and grace thorow the same Iesus Christ our lord And here are made iij. crosses Masse prystes make ij manifest lyes in the canon euen whan thei are most deuoutly at mass which thei can not denie One vp on the host whan the body is named another ouer the cupp whā the same is named the third is made crossing him selff And at this praier the prest boweth him selff a litle but he ought to knele downe seing he saith that he prayeth vp on his kneis and yet he doth not knele but only boweth him selff As in the first part of this canon he saith also that he kneleth and yet he kneleth not And here William Durant vpon thes wordes that is to say command that thes things may be caryed by the handes of thy holy Angel vpon the high altare c sayth that they be of so gret depth that mans vnderstanding is veri hardly sufficyent to enter in to them And minding to expound them he bringeth furth first Gregories wordes registerd in the decree of consecracyon the 5. distinction Cap. Quid sit sanguis And because he semed not satiffyed he bringeth furth iij. other exposityons the first is that that word Hec that is to say thes things may meane not the body and the bloode but the supplicacyons and prayers of the faithfull which prayers the angels offer vnto god And than he geuyth a nother significatyō wich doth not satisfie hym And affter he geueth also the third that is this Command that thes things that is to say the mistycall body of Christ which is gods warfaring church may be caryed to the high altare that is to say to the victorios church and that by the hādes of thy holy angel that is to say of christ who is an āgel of the great coūcel as Esai in the ix saith He addeth yet a nother which for shortnes i will lett passe It is an hard matter surely to defend an vniust cause for a man is constrayned to say many things that be not to the purpos Id nedeth not here that master Durāt shuld find owt so many glooses For the canon speaketh whan it sayth thes things of the host and of the wyne consecrated as it spake before in the other prayer and speketh not neither of the praiers nor of the misticall body ffor it made no mencion neither of the one nor of the other in the tother praier And desyring in this prayer that god wold cōmād thes things to be caried by the hādes of his āgels ther is shewed by thos wordes thes things the selff same off which he spake off in the other prayer immedyately going before And iff he shuld haue ment of other things it shuld not haue bene to the purpos More ouer iff it shuld haue ment of the prayers or of the misticall body thes wordes shuld not haue bene of so gret depth as he sayth Yea they shuld haue bene very easy to vnderstand which is against Durant hym selff Therfor than the canon speaketh of the host and wyne consecrated which be as they thinck the very body and the very blood off Ihesus Christ and desyereth that they may be caryed and presēted vpon gods high altar that is to say in heauen in gods sight What a tale is this that Christ ◅huld be caryed by the hands of angels and pre◅ented in to gods sight Is not Christ now by hym selff present in heauē in the sight of the father withowt being caried ād presented bi the āgels What the article of our faith sayth that he sitteth at the right hand of god and Paul to the Hebrews saith that he sitteth there contynually He. x. what nedeth it than to cary hym where he is allredy Iff any mā wold say that the angels may cary hym so farr as he is in the sacramēt because that affter that sort he is on the earth This saing is a very mōster ād vanytye for Christ so farr as he is in the sacramēt because he is there vnpartably as thei thinck he is there in such sort as he cā not be caried as the scole mē thēselues say More ouer iff he shuld be caried forth affter such sort as he is in the sacrament it were necessary that the angels shuld cari the sacramēt in to heauen which is neuer sene I haue said now that he that hath put in thes ij praiers in to the canō bi the talcke that he maketh doth shewe that he by leueth not Christes corporall presence in the sacrament as we told yow in the former chapter For iff he had bileued it he wold neuer haue said such wordes iff he had had any vnderstōding He than that made thes praiers the opinion of thes scole men standing is an heretike And master Durant to defend the canon because he sawe that thes wordes according to his opinion could not stond he magnifieth them as diuine things but it neded not being mens wordes and not of the holy scripture so moch to magnifie them and to defend expresse errors desiring to make them holy matters as he is forced to doo in that his rationall or reason giuer The x. part is the Memento in which the dead are praied for And thus it saith Also o lord haue in thy rememberance thy seruants men and wemen here is made a particular rememberans for certen particular dead folkes as like him that saith masse and affter is added The which are gone before vs with the signe of faith and slepe in the slepe of peace To thes o lord and to all thos that rest in Christ we pray the that thow wilt grant place of comfort of light and of peace thorough the same Christ our lord Amen Here master Durant in thexposicion of this part saith that on the sonday thorough our lordes resurrectiō it is thought that the sowles shuld haue rest He meanith I think that thei suffer not the paines of purgatory but the other daies thei doo O master Durant it is very honest that the sowles in purgatory also shuld kepe the feastes But I meruel why thei haue not rest also on the friday on which day our sauior suffered to take from vs the paines that we had deserued Esay 53. as the scripture saith in so many places and chefely in Esay the Prophete where it is writton that he hath borne our greffes and that the lord hath layed vpon him all our iniquities and how he was beaten for the wickednes of the peple and other such saings which be there Thapostle Paule wold not that there shuld be difference of dayes in Christes church in this life And rebuked the galathians who obserued dayes Gala. 4. And he wrote to the colossians Let no mā iudge yow in meate or drinck Colos 2. or in part of an holy day or of a newe moone or off the sabboth dayes c. And shall we put
saith ij short praiers In the first is des◅ered that the sacrament may be taken with a cleane mind and that it may become vnto vs an euerlasting remedy The second desireth that the body and blood of Christ may come nigh to our bowels and that there may not remaine any spott of sinne whan the ij praiers are done and the clensing made with water or wine or with th one and thother the post communion is next said that is to say certē short verses of the psalmes or of some other part of the scripture And affter are said the last praiers of the masse sometime one only iff the feast bee solēpne somtime ij somtime iij somtime moo as it hapnith And of thes praiers a gret part are wicked as that which saith We besech the allmighty and mercifull god let the sacramentes which we haue taken clense vs c. In the which is desired that that sacrament shuld be a wasshing of sinnes and among thother things that it might be the forgiuenes of all sinnes of all the faithfull liuing and deade As also that other that is to say Let this communion clense vs from sinne and at the intreati of the blessed Mari mother of god let it make vs partakers of the heuenly remedy And that other Let the receiuing of this sacrament be vnto me o lord forgeuenes of my sinnes c. And so many other as make mencion that sinnes shuld be taken away or forgeuen by the receiuing of the sacrament And also thos that make mencion that bi such receiuing euerlasting helth and glory shuld be geuen vs. Off which praiers thorowt the masse booke there is a gret nomber as well before the consecracion as affter And chefely the last Thei be all wicked For the receiuing of the sacramentes is not that that forgeueth sinnes no nor that that giueth vs helth Thes offices be to gret nor thei doo not belong to the sacramentes as at large we will proue in the iiij part Where we will shewe that the sacramentes be not instituted for such causes Beside this it is to be noted that many of thes praiers are contrary to the priuate masse that is to say contrary to that where the peple doo not communicate but only the prest receiueth the ost and the cupp Because thei make plaine mencion that the multitude of the peple hath bene partakers of the sacrament and not the prest only As that is which saith Satiasti Domine familiam tuam etc. that is to say thow hast filled o lord thy famili with holy gifftes and speaketh of the sacrament And this praier is said very offt affter the sacrament receiued And that other Corporis sacri pretiosi san◅guinis repletilibamine that is to say Being filled with the receaued sacrifice of thy holy body ād preciouse blood And so many other as giue to vnderstād that the peple hath cōmunicated it is plain that suche praiers can not be trew onlesse the people receiue the sacrament and yet the prest saith them as though the people had receiued and in dede receiued nothing at all By thes praiers and such like wherof there are a gret nōber in the masse hooke which are said affter the prest hath receiued the host and the cupp is geuen vs to vnderstand that the masse in that time that thos praiers were made was no nother than the holy communion And the same supper of the lord which offt times was made because thei wold neuer haue spoken affter that sort iff the prest alone shuld haue receiued thost and the cupp And it is not to be answered here that thes praiers speake in the plurall nomber and not of the prest only because the prest doth communicate in all the peples name seing that euen as one can not be baptised for a nother so can he not receiue the supper for a nother And affter a certen sort there is likelines betwene this spirituall supper and the comon suppers or daili eatings We will neuer say that one can eate for a nother but euery one doth eate for him selff and thones meate can not help thother So is it of the holy supper that euery one ought to receiue for him selff Also the sainge of the prest geuith vs to vnderstand this who whan he saith such praiers turnith him to the peple and saith Oremus that is to say let vs pray all to gether and willeth that the peple shuld pray as well as he and shuld say the same wordes that him selff saith Which wordes can not be verified if the prest only shuld communicate and not the peple Which thing also the name of the communion teachith vs which agreith not to one only but to mani So that than such praiers be contrary to the priuate masse and can not be trewe iff the peple doo not communicate But of necessitie must be false Therfor they giue vs to vnderstand that sometime thei were trewe that is to say whan the things were not yet in that disorder that thei be at this present THE THIRD CHAPTER How the first praier of the masse for the deade is f◅lissh and to no purpos The pistle of tha pocalipse doth gainsay not only the first praier but generalli all the mass for the deade The offertory also is an vnfit praier WE haue not yet particularly touched the masse for the deade but for the liuing And iff we wold tell all the errors that be there our booke shuld growe to greate But our mind is at this time to make plaine that the masse is the greatest error that is in all christendom This shall suffise vs for this time I doo not dowt but this our anatomy as rude as it is will wake vp some other to handell this argument or matter more worthily than I haue done And so I desire for the dere loue of Iesus Christ that thei to whom god hath giuen more vnderstōding of his things than to me that thei will take in hand this enterprise to the honor of god ād profite of his church because it is most waighty and worthy to be well handeled Now let vs looke vp on this mass for the deade In the masse for the deade the first prayer desyreth that the sowle of the dead man or dead wo mā shuld not be geuē in to the hādes of the enemy but shuld be receyued by the holy angels ād caryed to the contry of paradyse to th entēt that hauing byleued and hoped it shuld not suffer the euerlasting payne but possesse theuerlasting loies But to what purpos doth his prayer desyre that that sowle of the dead man or woman shuld not suffer euerlasting payne iff it be in such state as it can not be damned and ◅o which such a request doth not agree It is playne that the church prayeth not for thē that be damned as also according to their opynyon it prayth not for them that are blessed and in liffe euerlasting So that than being no perell nor
And there he telleth the significacions of thos Agnus deies the which affter ward be distributed or delt to the peple by the pope him selff on the satterday in Aâ—…bis that is to say the first saterday affter caster And in th end describing the vertu of thes Agnus deies he saith that thei by the vertu of their consecracion and blessing defend the byleuers froÌ„ lightning aÌ„d teÌ„pest But sureli the pope hath done a great wrong to his Agnus deiies that hauing himselff auctoritie aÌ„d powr to giue to things all thos â—…tewis that him listeth as he hath geueÌ„ uÌ„to Asshes powr to work redeÌ„pcioÌ„ of sinÌ„es aÌ„d to the holy water salted the which euery prest caÌ„ blesse the vertu to driue a waie deuels aÌ„d to saue meÌ„ chefely to that water of the holisabbath which is caried from how 's to hous and hath geueÌ„ so meruelos vertuis so so many other things as we may see in this chapter of the blessings he hath done a gret wroÌ„g to his Agnus dei which no maÌ„ can blesse but himselff that he hath not geueÌ„ theÌ„ the vertu of the herbe Agnus casiê° of the which Dioâ—…corides aÌ„d Galene doo write seing the prestis the friers the monkes aÌ„d the noÌ„nys aÌ„d vniuersaly all the ecclesiastical state haue so moch nede off it For all haue vowed chastitie and mariage is forbidden them It were moch more to the purpos to geue them this vertu and so to take a way so great an abhomination from the world as sendeth the stink of it euen to heauen than that vertu to serue against lightning and tempest O benommed and blind world whaÌ„ wilt thow beginne to open thine eies to remember thy selff and to see how myserably thow art bowght and sold And by whom By them that professe to haue the in charge It is the right iudgement of god For whan fables are preched euery man bileueth them But let gods word christds doctrine and truth come and be preachet it is not only as a perelous error despised but rather fersely persecuted THE FOVRTH PART The fourth aÌ„d last part foloweth the which is of the abuses and of the abhomynacions of the masse and hath vi chapters THe first is that the mass doth not satisfie for them nor applie such things to man THE I. CHAPTER ALthough we haue in the former partis touched many abuses and errors of the mass neuertheles we intend in this last specially to treate of certen partycular and great abusis As for example that the mass shuld forgeue sinnes that it shuld satisfie for them or els that it shuld applie to vs such forgiuenes or satisfaction and that it shuld be a sacrifice for the liuing and for the deade Than next also that the same masse is mans inuention and not gods made by many And to be short we will speake of many other abuses which partly are touched aÌ„d of many wheroff yet ther is no mencion made And first we will proue that the mass forgeueth not sinnes satisfieth not god for them nor applieth not to vs the forgeuenes and satisfactioÌ„ made by Christ And to say the contrary is a very gret error and abuse And I proue it affter this sort For thos that affirme the mass to worke thes effectis either thei will and meane it of all the mass that is to say of all thos words that are said and ceremonies that are done from the beginning to the end and of all that made heape of wordes and gestures or els thei meane of the sacrament of the body and of the blood only the which is chefely considred in the mass Iff thei meane it of the whole masse it is false For by saing of wordes and by doing of ceremonies sinnes are not forgeuen Seing that iff a man shuld say the whole bible ouer which are gods wordes from the beginning to the ending an hondreth times thei could not forgeue him his sinnes How than shall sinnes be forgeuen or satisfaction made for them by saing masse which is mans inuencion as we will proue in the third chapter It is plaine that sinnes are not forgeuen by saing of wordes nor doing of ceremonies bycause that Iustificacion els shuld be by workes which is contrary to Paule Who dowâ—…eth that the speaking and vttring of wordes shuld be our worke Yea who is that wicked man that can not doo this say many Psalmes praiers lessons and doo ceremonies Roma 3.4.5.8 Gallat 2.3.4.5 Coloss 2. The deuell him selff can say many wordes that be holy and of god Paul thapostel as we haue in so many places of his epistles to the Romans to the Galathians and the colossians saith that no man is Iustified that is to say no mans sinnes are forgeuen him by the workes of the lawe commanded by god And he meaneth of those lawe whether it be of the commandementis which is the morall lawe or els of the ceremoniall lawe And will we say that sinnes be forgeuen by reading or speaking of wordes or els by doing of cerimonies not commanded by god but diuised by men This can not be Iff thei will say that thei meane not of all the mass but only of the sacrament the which hath this vertu and strength to forgeue sinnes and to satisfie god for them or els to applie Christes redemption to them for whom the masse chanceth to be said This is not trewe neither but is veri fals For the office of the sacraÌ„ents is not to worke thes effectis but it is to be token theÌ„ and to bring theÌ„ to mind and to assure vs of them For iff the sacrament shuld haue this vertu it shuld haue it chefely towardes them that worthily shuld receiue and take the sacrament but it hath it not to wardes thos same wherfor it hath it not towardes no nother That no sacrament not only that of the lords supper shuld haue this office I wil make it plaine and proue it For the worthy receiuing of the sacrameÌ„t whether it be of thankes geuing or of baptime presupposeth forgiuenes of sinnes and Iustificacion than neither the one nor the other doth it It is plaine that none ought to take what so euer Sacrament yow will iff he be of age except he doo trewe repentance and haue trewe faith But he that doth trewe repentance and hath trewe faith Actor 10. his sinnes are forgeuen him and he is Iustified as we haue in thactes of thapostles Peter saith speaking in Cornelius the hunderders how 's in Caesarea To this saith he that is to sai to Christ for he spake of him all the Prophetes beare witnes that euery one that byleueth in him receiueth forgeuenes of sinnes by his name And Paule also saith Actor 13. knowe ye o men and brethern that by this and he spake of Christ the forgeuenes of sinnes is declared to yow and by him that is to say by Christ euery one that byleueth is iustified from all thos things from the which yow could not be Iustified
expressely and more clerely betoken than thold For so moch as now in our time there is gretter knowlege of christ and off grace because it is the time of fullnes So our sacraments can more clereli betokē than theires But that thei can satisfie or forgeue sinnes or Iustifie man or geue grace or applie it to the same man Thei can not doo it as neither thold sacraments could doo any of thes things as we haue proued before Concerning forgeuenes of sinnes and Iustification it is plaine that thei do it not because that necessarily both th one and thother must goo before the sacraments iff thei shuld be worthily receiued Thapplication also of Christes satisfaction and redemption is made by faith the which receiueth the whol worke of our saluation by gods grace thorow Christ ād receiue forgeuenes Iustification holimaking and redemption from the mere and pure grace of god thorow Christ and not from any other thing and to it doth attribute and geue all the praise and glory Roman 3. as we haue in the pistle to the romanes And therfor the sauior so offt doth beate in this faith saing that who so euer beleuyth in him hath life euerlasting geuing to ūderstād that bi faith are receiued the benifites of saluaciō bi gods grace thorow Christ ād he that hath it not is not partaker of such benifites Therfor whan we find in the saings of the Euangelistes or of thold doctors that the sacraments forgiue sinnes as that of mark and luke that Iohn preached the baptime of repentans in forgiuenes of sinnes or els in thactes of thapostels that Ananias said vnto paul Rise vp baptise the and wassh thy sinnes And the crede receiued from the church which saith confiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum And such like saings the which seme to attribute the forgeuenes of siinnes to baptim I say that thei must be vnderstand safely by that figure which attributeth to the signe that that belongeth to the signified The saing of luke and mark and the article of the faith are vnderstand affter this sort that is to say that the baptime is a signe of the forgeuenes of sinnes The saing of Ananias whan he saith to Paul wassh thy sinnes is as moch to say as take the signe of the wasshing And that saing of Peter in thactes of thapostels Actor 2 whan he saith Be repentant for sinnes and let euery one of yow be baptised for the forgeuenes of your sinnes is thus vnderstand Let euery one of yow be baptised in token of forgeuenes of your sinnes And so of thother saings that attribute the forgeuenes of sinnes to the sacramentes we must giue them the trewe vnderstanding that is to say that thei be tokens of such forgeuenes and thei certifie the byleuers of the same but thei be not the cause And iff any wold axe to what end than be the sacraments geuen iff thei work none of thes effectes that is to say iff thei forgeue not sinnes iff thei Iustifie not satisfie not saue not nor applie not such things to man I answer as before that thoffice of the sacraments is to be witnessing signes of thes said things and thei be as it were certen sealis which assure vs of the forgeuenes of sinnes of gods grace and of saluacion The merciful god and our fauorable father sawe how we are by nature vnbyleuing and weake And ther for for maintenans of our faith and help of our weaknes causeth not only his word that is to sai the holi gospell to be preached vs but cōfirmeth vs in the faith with the sacraments and sheweth vs by certen owtward signes and plaine to our sensis that which is preached by the word Wherfor whā we here said he that beleueth the gospell his sinnes are forgeuen hym and affter we see one baptise with water and knowe that this baptime is ordeined by god to signifie such a thing we be confirmed in faith that is to say we bileue more surely perceiuing that baptime is ordeined to signifie that euen as the water wassheth the spottes or the vnclen̄es of the bodi so is he that byleuyth wasshed with in the sowle The sacraments haue other offices of the which it is not our mind presently to speake It suffiseth that amōg other thei haue this that is to say to bring vs forgeuenes of sinnes gods grace and our saluation not only at that time whan thei be geuen but thorowt all our liffe whan so euer thei come in to our remēberans so that we bileue And thei work not all this effect by their own vertu but by tholy institution and because thei be a ministery of the spirite as gods word is Returning therfor to the purpos I say that it is a gret abuse and supersticion willingly to goo abowt to say that the sacrament of thanksgeuing forgeueth sinnes for it is gods grace that forgeueth sinnes thorow christ whan we bileue with a trewe faith ād not the sacrament of thanksgeuing It is trew in dede that this sacrament doth certifie vs of that thing because it bringeth to our remembrans that christ gaue his body and his blood for our redemption and how his death is cause of our life but it worketh not the forgeuenes nor it can not work it as we haue before proued And iff thos that defend the mass shuld say that thei meane of the forgeuenes of the paine and not of the fawte whan thei say that the masse forgeueth sinnes And that affter this sort also the praier of the mass booke ought to be vnderstand in the which is made mention of such forgeuenes that is to say that thei be vnderstanden of the forgeuenes of the paine and not of the fawt Tho this I say first that the praiers absolutely make mention of the forgeuenes of sinnes and doo not any thing speake of the paine wherby it appeareth that thei meāe of the fawt which is princypall in sinne And the selff same wordes shewe that thei meane of the fawt As for exāple that praier haec nos communio domine purget a crimin It saith not liberet a poena but purget a crimine that is to say from the fawt And that other which saith Sit absolutio scelerū that is to say let it be a discharge of the fawtes ād affter al◅o it saith Sit uiuorū atque mortuorum fidelium remissio omniū delictorum that is to say let it be a forgeuenes of all the sin̄es of the faithfull liuing and deade Thes wordes surely being so generall as thei be of all sin̄nes as well of the liuing as of the deade can not conueniently be vnderstād only of the paine ād not of the fawt Than the Summistis ād scol mē defenders of the masse say that theffect of this sacramēt is to forgeue veniall sinnes ād also mortall wherof man hath no cōsciens that is to say as I thinck whan either he remēbreth not or Iudgeth not thē to be deadli sinnes allthough
him them selues to god not only for the liuing but also for the deade Iff christ be offered one only time and that hath fuffised what nedeth it any more to offer affter any maner of sort Iff that only time haue suffised for sinne what nedeth it more to say masse to that end Oh say thei the masse is that which applieth the merite of christes passhion But from whens gather thei that their saing but â—…owt of their own braine I will not say from the spirite of Antichrist It is not ynough to say that it is so but thei must proue it by the scripture The masse auaileth them not to applie the merite of christes Passion Faith sufficeth as before we haue saide For by the testimony of peter and Paul he that bileueth in Christ his sinnes be forgeuen him and he Iustified The other saing is that Christ in th end of the world hath appeared ones by thoffering of hym selff to dryue a way and to destroye synne that is to say all the synnes of the elect Iff he haue destroyed all sinne with his sacryfyce ones made to what purpos shuld we make moo sacryfices It nedeth not any more to doo that that is alredy done And that last saing what doth it meane That is that as it is appoynted and ordeyned that all men shall ones dye and affter Iudgement shall come so Christ is ones offered to take away the synnes of many that is to say of all thelectt The scripture vseth offt this word many for all thelectt as we haue in mathew Math. 20 where Christ sayth that the son of man was come to geue his lyfe for the redempcyon of mani And whan he dyd institute the sacrament he said that his blood shuld be shed for many Math. 26 Roma 5 And Paul to the romans sayth that by chrystes obedyeÌ„s many be made iust This word Many in all thes places importyth as moch as all thelect To our purpos iff it be appointed and ordeyned that Chryst shuld be offered one tyme for the sinnes of many as it is appoynted that all men ones shall dye what nedeth it any more to offer hym will we doo against gods ordynans Here the defenders of the masse answer that Christ is ones offered affter that maner that is to say suffering and dying and affter that sort it nedeth not that he shuld be any more offered because that only time suffised But now he is offered affter a nother sort that is to say sacramentally and affter this sort he may be offten offered for sinne This answer is nothing worth For iff Christ at that only time whan he offerd him selff destroied sinÌ„ to what purpos nedeth it to offer him any more to that effect and to doo that is alredy done The destruction of all sinnes was wrought by that only time that Christ was offered It nedeth not any more to doo it neither affter that nor affter any other sort In the tenth chapter he saith first Hebr. 1â—… that iff the sacrifices the which were offered in the lawe could haue made men perfite that is to say clensed them perfitely thei shuld not haue bene many times done becaus that thei that shuld haue done them being ones clensed shuld not haue had any more coÌ„sciens that is to say gnawing of sinne For that thing that taketh a way sinne taketh a way also the gnawing of the consciens for cause of sinne And this word sinne is put there for all sinnes And he addeth that the blood of bulles aÌ„d of hegootes caÌ„ not take a waâ—… sinnes and therfor he that is to say Christ entering in to the world speaketh the wordeâ—… of the psalme Psal 39. that is to say thow woldiâ—â— not haue sacrifice nor oblacioÌ„ nor thow art not delyted in whole burnt offerings for sinnes Thaâ—… I said lo I come that I may doo oh god thy will And affter he saith By the which wilâ—… we are halowed through the offring of Christes body ones done And affter a fewe wordes aâ—… it were shewing the caus why we be hallowed by the offring of Ihesus Christes body ones done he saith becaus that with one only offring he hath made perfite thos that be halowed Which thing the holy goost doth witnes the which foretold that god wold make a newe testament And amongst other things he saith that he wold nomore remember their sinnes that is to say his peples and his electis sinnes And he addeth that where forgeuenes off sinnes is wrought there nedeth not any more to make other oblacion that is to say to offer other sacrifice for sinne Thes wordes be cannon shot is ynough to beate down the whole bilding of the masse or els thei be swordes ynough to throte cutt hir or vtterly to kill hir First he saith that iff the sacrifices of the lawe had bene able to make meÌ„ perfite the selff same shuld neuer haue bene so offten done again becaus that they that had sacrifised shuld not haue had any more consciens of sinne being allredy ones clensed and purged Here the text saith plainely that it nedeth not to doo again thos sacrifices which take a way sinnes and make meÌ„ perfite the which is all one Iff the masse take a way sinnes why doo they say it so offten It shuld suffise to say one only to satisfie for them for whoÌ„ it shuld be said or that say it and to forgiue their sinnes Here the text saith that therfor thos sacrifices were the more offtened becaus they could not take a way sinnes Iff they had taken them a way it had not nedid to doo the selff same againe The defenders of the masse say that they doo no nother sacrifice in the masse but the selff same that christ did and that they doo offten O goodly ymaginacions They putt than Christ offten vp on the crosse wetingly done and of purpos The Iewes vnderstode not that Christ was Christ nor they knewe him not and therfor they crucified him as Paul to the Chorinthes saith And they knowe that Iesus is Christ and yet they put him so many times vp on the crosse 1. cho 2. and thei be so many times made giltie of his body and bloode as they say masses It is a godly sacrifice What will thei say here to the reason that the text maketh that is to say that if thos sacrifices of the lawe had bene able to take a way sinnes thei shuld not haue be done more than ones Iff the masse take a way sinnes why is it said again so offten Than Further as we haue said Iff that sacrifice which christ hath made one only time that is to say whan he offred him selff did than forgiue sinne and that only time sufficed what nedeth it to make any more sacrifices for sinnes The second saing is that we be halowed by gods will through the oblatioÌ„ that is to say the sacrifice of christes body ones made Iff we be halowed that is to
the which Christ hath cōmanded shuld be preached to euery creature What els be thes wordes but that Christ hath geuō his body and his blood for our rāsom ād forgeuenes of our sinnes Seing this thing is of necessitie that it shuld be preached to euery Christiā nor he is not a Christiā that doth not bileue why doo thei not say it with a lowd voice as in the old time it was wont to be Here thei find certen scusis and among other thei say that such wordes ought to be said in secret to th entent that the high holy wordes shuld not become vile And that it is red how in old time whan the canon was said with a lowd voice as it were all did vnderstand thos wordes and did openly sing them in the streates ād in the waies Wherupon certen shepardes singing thos wordes and hauing laid the breade vp on a certen stone at the vttering of the wordes the bred was turned in to flessh and for this caus the fire came from heauen that killed them for the which thing the holy fathers haue ordeined that vp on paine of cursing such wordes in the masse shuld be said in secret and with the holy garmentis This master William Durant saith in his racional of diuine offices Soo what fowndacions thes be I will not say fables of saing the wordes of the sacramēt in secret Iff thes wordes for this caus ought to be said in secret to th entēt that the high holy wordes shuld not become vile than it were nedefull to say the holy gospell in secret ād not to preach it openly with a lowd voice For what wordes be more high holy than thos of the holy gospell Furthermore the holy fathers that haue ordeined this iff it be trewe in dede that thei did ordeine it why did thei not rather command that the holy wordes shuld be pronownced with reuerens withowt making them say them in secret The which wordes among all the rest that are said in the masse euer◅ Christēman ought singularly to vnderstand Ought not euery Christian to knowe that Christ hath geuin his body and his blood for our ransom And that for remembrans of so gret a mistery Christ hath ordeined this sacrament And what els doo the wordes of the consecraciō say exeept this in substance I could here iff I wold say many things but what nedeth it to heape wordes in so plaine a matter It is withowt dowt a gret abuse to vtter thos wordes in secret The wordes of the sacrament ought to be hard of all withowt the which it is no sacrament neither the bread nor the wine nor any other thing iff that the significacion of it be not knowen nor that can not be knowen but by the same wordes of the sacrament Let vs goo on further A nother abuse is that Christes death is not shewed to them that be present contrary to saint Paul the which saith that in the vse of the sacrament the lords death ought to be shewed saing in his 1. to the Corinthians As offten as yow shall eate this bread and drink the cupp 1. Cor. 11. ye shall shewe the lordes death vntill he come that is to say yow shall preach it It is clere that in the masse the lords death is not shewed nor preached to the peple And what speake I of the daily and priuate masses It is not shewed neither in the time of the communiō whā thei reach furth the host to the cōmunicāts where thei ought to teach the pore peple of the significaciō ād of the importance of the sacramēt Thei sai nothing to thē except whether he bileue that Christ be in that host or no. As though Christ had instituted the sacramēt to th entent that it shuld be bileued that he were in that host so gret and so large as he was vp on the wood of the crosse and not for remēbrans of his death Yet Christ him selff said doe this in my remembrans and said not bileue ye that I am hid den in this bread so gret and so large as presently yow see me This was not Christes meaning for so moch as he wold haue said it Wherfor thā is not Christes death shewed in the masse Surely this is a manifest abuse The fourth abuse is that the prest alōne doth take that his sacrament I call i◅h◅s becaus in dede it is no sacrament and he geuith no part of it to any other But this is no communion for a communion is whan many do communicate or take part of one selff thing This maner of taking this sacrament is against Christ who hath instituted it to th entent that it shuld be taken in communion and not priuately and against sent Paul in the forsaid place ◅ Cor. 11. who rebuketh the chorinthes becaus thei did not take the sacrament together and with cōpany nor thei did not tary one for a nother And iff he so sharply rebuked them becaus thei did not tary one for a nother allthough that all shuld take the sacrament how wold he haue suffered that one only shuld haue taken it Thei doo also against the wordes which thei speake in the cōsecration For before thes wordes that thei say Hoc enim est corpus meum there be thes that is to say accipite manducate ex hoc omnes that is to say take yow and eate you all of this bread Why than doo thei not geue it to all or to many as Christ commanded according to their own opinion Parauenture thei will say that Christ spake thes wordes for thapostles and not for any other But this is not reasonably spoken for so moch as Christ taught them withthes wordes that he spake how thei shuld doo and minister this sacrament Iff he shuld haue spoken thes wordes for the Apostles only the Apostles them selues shuld neuer haue knowen how to haue ministred the sacrament to others but only to them seluis Furthermore in old time this is certen that there was no priuate masse said that is to say that one only shuld take the sacrament that is the priest that celebrateth but allweis there was a communion vsed In token of this the grekis did neuer receiue the priuate masse doing better in this part than the latines and keping Christis institucion and the apostolyke vse A nother abuse is that thei make it auayle for euery thing Thei applye it for the raine for the fayre wether against tempest warr derth pestylens and against all sortys of diseases for the holsomnes of the ayre for plenty peace helth of body for waifaryng men for wiues and husbandes against enemyes for the liuyng for the deade and for what thing is not the masse sayd In prayse of our lady of the angels of the sayntes for repentant for thos that geue allmes for thē that sayle for the Imprisoned for the remaining in a place for to call for wisdom It is said against persecutors for ani maner of troble for the
fury Banisshment bondage aÌ„d other worldly ponisshments be in comparison of owre desertes of litil weight and smal punisshmentes becaus thei all passe a way and with the present liffe shortly doo end but the spirituall ponisshments and thos of the sowle that allweies continewe that is to say the euerlasting owtcasting the horrible and continuall wailings who can esteme them and worthily consider them Seing it is thus than O Christian peple flee this masse the which many waies kindleth gods wrath Flee it as a deadly and most perellos pestilens of your sowles And yow chefely which were and yet be ministers of so gret abhomynacion Seing now that ye knowe it cease from saing and celebrating it any more and froÌ„ being caus to make the poore peple committ so grett an error And doo yow penans for that which is past and desire yow the most fauorable lord and our heauenly father that he wold deale with yow not according to your sinnes but according to the multitude of his mercies that he wold deliuer yow from all euel through Iesus Christ our sauior THE SIXT CHAPTER That the mass is of such qualitie and crafft and affter such sort abhominable that no man liuing for any maner of pretens respect or occasion that can be may by any maner of meanes with a safe consciens either say it heare it or any waies be present at it MANS nature is of such sort craffty and wittie that it can tell euen how to deceiue it selff There are fownd in the world certen excellent dise Coggars and cardsetters that trapp as it were all men that thei haue to doo with and it behoueth a man to be well ware least thei begyle him neuertheles thei doo only begile other and not them selues But our nature is so shiftfull and ware that it doth not only begile other but it selff also And this it doth chefely in thos things that like them and serue for their commodities And it semith that it hath lerned the art of deceiuing of the suttle serpent tre which with his persuasions and IntisemeÌ„ts brought our first mother Eue to eate of the apple and to doo contrary to gods commandemeÌ„t making hir beleue one thing for a nother Euen so doth also man to wards him selff that can meruelosly color and sett a face on his deceites to make them excusable Not wiâ—…hstonding whan he hath well turned and tossed him selff with as many scusys as he can bring furth it is fownd at â—â—ight that he hath erred And he plainely seith that his crafftes be very folies There be many now a daies in Germany in FraÌ„ce in Spaine in Italy that haue receiued the gospell and haue the knowlege of Christ but finding them selues in the middes of their enemies and fearing persecution chefely whan thei see the poore Christians to be euell handled the which now by this hatefull name to the world be called Lutherans And that some of them be taken and putt in to the gallies Some Imprisoned some other be cruelly tormented vp on the Racke Some hanged Other drowned in the riuers and other burnt thei be affraied And becaus thei wold not be marked and accused for Lutherans thei goo to the masse and doo against their consciens And to proue that this is trewe iff the feare that thei haue had not bene thei wold neuer haue gone to the masse And the caus why thei wold not haue gone is that thei shuld haue thought to haue done euill and against their consciens this is clere Yet as I haue said being affraied either of losing their temporall goodes or rather their skinn thei doo as other doo And to the intent that thei might affter some sort be scused thei alleage certen pretensis with the which thei deceiue them seluis and the reasons that thei bring furth be thes The 1. reason First thei say that iff thei goo not to masse and EueÌ„songe or other vsed ceremonies thei feare to lay a grett Stumbling stock for the simple and weake and to geue them occasion to thinck or els at least suspect that thei be despisers yea scorners of Christian religion or els heretikes and enemies of the church and not going to masse there is geuen them a wicked example seing the poore sowles think such things to be lawfull and christianlike And that for such respectt it is well done to goo to the masse and to their seruice and to dissemble so long till thei may haue goten the trewe knowlege And whan thei goo not to the masse the simple take a very euil example to doo the like against their consciens Than next the Apostle Paul doth teach vs The second reason to applie our selues to all men and to fasshon our selues with other as we haue in the first to the Corinthes where he saith I am made seruant of all men to the Iewes I am made a Iewe 1. chor 9. to winn them To theÌ„ that be vnder the lawe as though I were vnder the lawe to th entent that I might winne them To them that be withowt lawe as though I were withowt lawe allthough that I as to ward god am not withowt lawe but bownd to Christes lawe to th entent that I might winn them I am made to the weake as though I were weake to th ende that I might winn the weake I am become allthings to all that at the least I might winn some Iff thapostle Paul applied him selff to all and did teach that the like also ought to be done by others Why shall not we goo to the masse with other doing as thei doo applieng our selues to them whan we seeke to winne them The third reason Psal 7. Ierem. 17. Apocal. 2. Also the scripture saith that god is the sercher of hartis and he looketh chefely vp on the mindes and considreth to what end a thing is done this is plaine Therfor iff one with a good entent shall goo to the masse not to offend god but only for the foresaid respectis that is to say for to auoide geuing of euil example and occasioÌ„ of slaÌ„der to the weake but rather to drawe theÌ„ by litle aÌ„d litle to the knowlege of Christ he shall not sinne chefely not consenting to the abuses and to thos supersticions that there be committed for so moch as the sinn is in the will and in the consent and not in the owt ward shewe The 4. reason Furthermore by this that we goo to the masse we allowe no nother thing but Christis institution that is to say the sacrament of Iesus Christes body and blood For not withstonding thos addicions that be made there the substaÌ„ce of the same sacrament by this is not taken a waye as by the addicioÌ„s that be made in baptisme that is to say salt spittle creame Tapers Light Coniurings and that the child is axed of the faith And to conclude that euery thing is said in an vnknowen tong thes addicions make not that it shuld not
gentiles he vsed their meates he kept company with them to haue occasion to conuert thē to Christ. And thes things were no sinn but in thos things wherein he shuld haue offēded God he wold neuer haue applied him selff vnto them And that this is trewe Consider that we reade not that euer he did honor the Idols or els went to ther sacrifices And why soo Becaus he shuld haue offended God So we knowing that the Masse is an abhominacion we ought not by any maner of meanes to goo to it but rather to dye than to goo thether becaus it is against God and Christes honor as we haue proued To that other scuse which saith that God beholdeth the hartis and considereth to what end a thing is done and so that a man doo not consent with his hart to the abuses that be committed in the Masse it is no sinn to goo to it I answere that if this reason auailed the martyrs as I haue sayd before might haue worshipped the Idols withowt sinn and we with a good consciens may denye Christ For allthough that the martyrs shuld haue worshipped the Idols thei wold neuer haue worshipped thē with the hart but only owtwardly and vnwillingly And we may denye Christ with the mowth but not with the hart And what incōueniencis be thes Christ wil not only that we shuld byleue in him but wil that we also shuld confesse him with the mowth ād with the owtward dedes for els we shall not be trew Christiās Math. 10. but we shall be denyed of him as he sayth in S. Mathew He that shall acknowlege me before men I wil acknowlege him before my father which is in heauen Luck 12. And in Luke he sayth before the angels of God And he that shall denye me before mē I will denye him before my father which is in heauē And thapostle Paul saith to the Romans Roma 10. With the hart men byleue to Iustice but with the mowth is made the confession to safetye God wil for 2. respectis haue of vs the owtward confession that is to say that we shuld make plaine to men our faith and religion as well with wordes as with dedes First for his own glory because that he is honored and glorified whan the trewe religion is openly vtterid Than further also for the benifite of our neighbor to th entent that by such confession he might folow the trewe knowlege of God and holy religion And to proue this trewe tell me affter what sort is the Christian religion increased except first by the preaching of the holy gospell and than by the blood of martyrs The ydolaters saw the poore Christians constant in acknowleging Christes name thei sawe them persecuted taken imprisoned ponisshed and miserably murdred and sayd to them selues surely this peple could neuer haue bene so constant with so great and stowt mindes nor thei wold neuer haue suffred so great tormentis and so sharp death iff thei had not bene certen that affter this present life there be laid vp for them most great rewards And iff this their religion had not bene trewe And affter this sort thei were conuertid to Christ and Christes religion increased that is to say the nomber of byleuers Further I say that trewe faith is not withowt the profession not only of wordes but of dedes and workes Hebr. 11. Paul saith to the Hebrewes that by faith the saintes haue wrought iustice and some of them by faith were racked tormented and beaton some were stoned some cutt in pecis sawed killed with the sword and diuers wayes exercised 2. Iohn 5. And Iohn in the 1. saith that our faith is the victory that ouercommith the world He that hath the trewe faith confesseth it and sheweth it with dedes Therfor to be short I answer to that reason and I say that it is trewe that God looketh vp on the hartis and iff the hart had not consentid there shuld not haue bene any sinne but here in this case the hart consenteth vnto it for iff the man had not agreid to goo to the Masse he wold not haue gone thether but he goith becaus he agreith to goo although he goo thether vnwillingly The hart had not consented iff the man had bene caried thether by force or drawen thether with roopes or chaynes And in such case he had not fawted But this chanceth not to thos that goo to the Masse becaus thei be not forced to goo thether but thei goo thether willingly although with a certen lothsomnes And we must knowe that all that which is done vnwillingly is not done by force for so moch as many things be done with grefe and vnwillingly and yet thei be done with the consent of the mind As for example the taking of a bitter medicine the causing of some sick parte of the body to be cutt of thes things shuld not be done iff the man were not content and did not agree to thē That saing that is to say that whan a man hath not a wicked but a good intent Roma 3. and doth that which he doth to help his neighbor is not to the purpos becaus we must not doo euell that good may come of it To the other reason or rather scuse the which saith that thei that goo to the Masse iff thei haue the knowlege of the gospell thei doo not allowe the abuses nor thos addicions that be there but only that which Christ made that is to say the Sacrament of his body and blood For thos addicions doo not take away the substans of the Sacrament I answer first that that Sacrament as we haue said before is not Christes trewe Sacrament but although that it were a trewe Sacrament it were not therfor conuenient to goo thether seing there is in the same so many falsedes so many errors and abuses which defile and staine the clearnes of Christes institucion Nor it is not ynough to say we doo allowe nothing but that which Christ did and not any other becaus that this allowing is only knowen to them selfes and not to other who whan thei see that one goeth to the Masse doo thinck that he allowith the whole and thei be confirmed in their error iff thei be wicked iff thei be not wicked thei haue occasion of offence and remayne offended And although that none were offended nor confirmed in wickednes yet vnderstonding that the Masse is a bottom and a rolle of blasphemyes how shuld the eares of the faithfull behable to heare and their eyes suffer to see so great an abhominacion the which so many wayes doth robb God and Christ of their honor yea that speaketh euell of them To the examples alleaged of Ioseph of the citie of Arimathea and of Nicodemus Iust and holy men the which for feare of the Iewes did dissemble I answer first that there is a great differens betwene thes 2. and thos that goo to the Masse For although for feare thei did not open
these as those except luke and paule did tell a lye which is not to be spoken Therfore we must nedes graunt that that cupp was turned into the new Testamēt or els at the least that the new Testament was in that cup the which is not trew for the new Testamēt is not the cupp nor is not in it but it is the ordinaunce or disposition the which god made to leaue to his elect childrē the euer lasting wealth that is to say the forgeuenes of sinnes the freing frō all euell the euerlasting lyfe ād the possessiō of euery good thing If thes be incōueniēces as we may see thē their opiniō is false The last reason is this The tenth reason Christ mai be eatē ād his bluod drōk onely two waies that is to say spiritually and sacramentally the which sacramentall eating therfore as we haue said serueth and is profitable to the spirituall eating I do not fynde after what other sort except these two we may eat Christ and drink his bluod But to eat Christ and drink his bluod after thes two sortes we nede not to put him really into the mouth nother his body nor his bluod therfore it is not necessary that Christ shuld be really in the sacrament That Christ may be eaten and his bluod dronk after these two sortes though that he really in body ād in soule be not in the sacrament I proue it thus First to receaue his body and his bluode spiritually we nede not to receaue hym by the bodely mouth it sufficeth to receaue him by faith that is to say to beleue in him as we proued before in the third reason nor it nedeth not I say for to eate his body ād drink his bluode after this sort that we should put ether the one or thother into the bodely mouth this is plaine because that such eating and drinking is done with the spirite and with the mynde And this the aduersary will not deny That also it is not necessary for the receauing him sacramētally that he shuld be really in the sacrament I proue it by the Apostle paule who saith to the Cor. that the hebrue is he people were baptised aswel they 1 Corin. 10 as we althoughe vnder other signes then oures because that we be baptised with water and that people sayth paule was baptised with the cloude dni with the sea passing thorow the middest of the read sea and that cloude that couered them and the red sea thorow the middest wherof thei al passed was to thē baptisinge where we may note that according to paule not onely they of full age were baptised but the children also because that all were couered with the cloude ād all passed thorow the middest of the sea I desired to say these few words for their sakes that be seduced by the wicked spirit of the Anabaptisticall error who being led about by sathan do denye the baptisme of children If the hebrues children were baptised in token that they were also of gods people for what cause should not now our childrē be baptised being no lesse of gods people thē they and being no lesse redemed by Christ thē they of full age this I desired to say by the waye After paule addeth in the same place that all did eat the self same spirituall food ād dronk all the self same spirituall drink And he calleth that spirituall meat or els foode whether you wil call it the paschal lamb and chefely the manna the which meates they all did eat and he calleth the spirituall drink that water which came out of the rock And he addeth that that rock was Christ that is to say did signifie Christ That spirituall foode that is to say the paschall lamb and the Manna did also signifie Christ as the water did betoken him although paule doth not expresly speake it And to be short he meaneth that the hebrueish people did aswell cōmunicate with those signes as we do that eat the sacramentall bread and sacramentall wyne And paule meaneth in his tong that all did eat and drink Christ sacramentally for so much as that to eat a thing sacramentally is none other but to eat the sacrament of the same Well now if that people did eat Christ and drinke his blood sacramentally when they did eat the paschall lamb and the manna and drunk that water that rann out of the rock the which things were a sacrament of Christ as the bread and the wyne be to vs and did signifie the same as paule sayth and Austen expoundeth it in the 45. treatyse vpon Iohn saing that those sacraments did signifie the self same that oures doo althoughe after an other sort And yet not withstanding they did not eat Christs body nor drink his bluod really putting thē in to the mouth What is the cause that we mai not also eate his body and drink his bluod sacramētally without eating or drinkinge him really and bodely forso much as that to eat or drink Christ sacramentally is none other but to receaue with the mouth his sacramēt And to be à sacrament it is not nedefull that the thing signified should be in the same sacrament and much lesse that there should be made any turninge of the substāces of the signes And it is enoughe that the sacrament should be a signe of the same that is to sai that it should signifie it according to the definition of a sacramēt which sayth Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum that is to say A sacrament is a signe of a holy thinge It is plaine that Christ as man was not really in the hebrues sacraments because he was not yet ether borne or incarnated And how could his body and his bluod be in those sacraments seing his body and bluod were not yet And yet paule saieth that they did eat the self same spiritual meat ād the self same spiritual drink that is to say Christ spiritually Certein expound paules text of the spirituall eating and drinking of that people that is to saye by faith but because that all did not eat and drink spiritually and by faith for so much as that a great parte of them as paule affirmeth in the text were vnbeleuers ād yet he sayth that all did eat the self same spirituall meat ād drink the self same spirituall drink I haue therfore expounded it of the sacramentall eating and drinkinge of the which all aswel beleuers as vnbeleuers did eat ād drink and not of the spiritual that is to saie by faith the which belōged to the beleuers onely And thoughe paule calleth that meat and drink spirituall yet he meaneth not that it should be spirituall in it self as that which is of faith is in dede spirituall but he calleth it spirituall as to the signification and as to the vse that is to say that it was apointed to signifie Christ who is a spirituall and an holy thinge as oure sacraments may be called spirituall things be cause they be appointed to spirituall