you would daily more and more increase go forward in the loue of the preaching of Gods word and to imitate that noble example of that noble man of AEthiopia Act. 8.22 who both read that in his charet trauailing by the way the Prophet Isaias and also heard Philip expound the same Euen so that your Honors may daily more more grow in the true knowledge feare and obedience of God Wherein true Nobilitie doth chiefely consist not onely daily and reuerently reade the word of God your selues but also diligently heare faithfull Philips that is godly and learned ministers truely expound and preach the same Which is most needfull for you For as that noble maÌ„ profited by reading but was conuerted vnto Christ by Philips preaching Rom. 10.14 so it is chiefly the preaching of the Gospel which winneth vs vnto Christ planteth faith worketh repentance in vs and directeth stirreth vs vp to walke warely vprightly before the Lord our god For as spice when it is brused is of more force to season meat when it is chewed is more meete to norish vs Euen so the word of god when it is by exposition as it were brused chewed applyed vnto vs is of more power to season the corrupt humors that be in vs effectually to feed vs that we may liue in holines righteousnesse vnto God for want coÌ„tempt of the preaching of Christs gospel it is lameÌ„table to see how many fearfully fal away from the grace of god Therefore that your Honors may not only constantly coÌ„tinue but also daily increase in the true worship and feare of God loue earnestly the preaching of gods word let it be dearer vnto you than thousands of gold and syluer sweeter than hony the hony comb hunger after it as your daily food Matth. 13 45. esteeme it for that pretious pearle which ought to be more dear vnto you thaÌ„ al these earthly and transitorie things of the world for all flesh is grasse Isai 40. and al the glorie thereof is as the flower of the fielde which soone fadeth and falleth away but the word of our God abideth for euer and shall make vs stand florish for euer in gods kingdome if faithfully in our heartes we beleeue it and obediently in our liues and conuersation follow it Thus assuring my self that your Honors will take in good part this my bolde aduenture in presenting this small mite and poore gift vnto you I will forbeare from further troubling you beseeching God the father of mercie so to worke by his holy spirit in you that you may be filled with the knowledge of his wil in al wisedome Colos 1.9 and spirituall vnderstanding that yee may walke worthy of the Lord pleasing him in all things being fruitfull in all good workes and increasing in the knowledge of God c. Your Honors most humble in Christ Iesus to commaund Edward Bulkley At my house in VVoodhall the 18. of Februarie 1586. A Sermon preached by Edward Bulkley Doctor of Diuinitie at Bletsoe the 30. day of Ianuarie 1585. vpon the doctrine of the Sacrament of the body and blood of Iesus Christ Matth. 26.26 As they did eate Iesus tooke breade and when he had blessed he brake it and gaue it to his disciples and said take ye eate ye This is my body Also he tooke the cuppe and when he had giuen thanks he gaue to them saying drinke ye all of this for this is my blood of the new Testament which is shed for many for the forgiuenes of sinnes I say vnto you that I will not drinke henceforth of this fruite of the vine vntill that day when I shall drinke it new with you in my Fathers kingdome And when they had song a psalme they went out into the mount of Oliues WHen the time did nowe drawe neare Ephes 5.2 that our Sauiour Christ was to offer that sweete smelling sacrifice and oblation of himselfe vpon the Altar of the crosse for our redemption reconciliation it seemed good to his heauenly wisedome to ordaine this Sacrament to be a perpetuall memoriall remembrance and pledge vnto vs of his death and passion vntill his comming againe 1. Cor. 11.25.26 And because the law did require the Paschal lambe at that time to be eaten he comming not to breake but to fulfill the lawe that he might discharge all our breaking of the law Matth. 5.17 did first with his disciples according to the law eat the passouer and so did put an end vnto the same and then did institute this his supper to succeed in his Church for euer in the place thereof That as he had ordayned baptisme to succéed in the roome of Circumcision so he would haue this Sacrament to succeed in the place of the Pascall Lambe and as they had béene Sacraments and seales of the olde Testament before his comming in the flesh so these might be after his comming sacraments and seales of the new Testament and couenant whereof we reade Hieremie 31.31 and Hebrewes 8.8 Therefore the Euangelist in the first words of my text saith As they did eat Meaning that when they had eaten the Paschall Lambe then they did receiue and eate this his holie supper Whereupon I may gather this that it is not so vnlawfull as some thinke after the tasting and eating of some thing to eate this blessed Sacrament The which I speake not for that I would haue men eate and drinke and fill their bellies before they come to this holy supper which with al reuerence and sobrietie ought in Gods feare to be receiued but to take away the superstition of some who think that if they being in neuer such infirmitie and weaknes do tast neuer so little they be thereby vnméete and vnworthy to receiue this holy mysterie and thereupon abstaine from it But if we did iudge rightly we should think that not the receiuing into vs of a little of Gods creatures soberly with thankesgiuing that vpon infirmitie doth make vs vnméete communicants but those things that come out of vs euen out of our hearts as euill thoughts murders Matâ—h 15.15 adulteries formeations theftes false testimonies slaunders are the things that defile vs and make vs more loathsome vnto Gods maiestie than any leprosie vnto men These thinges make vs vnméete gestes for such a celestiall banket and vnworthy receiuers of this blessed Sacrament of Christs body and blood Well saith Chrisostome Non enim comedisse confusionem nobis affert In Genes hom 10. sed mali quippiam egisse i. Not to eate but to commit any wickednesse bringeth shame vnto vs. Therefore I exhort you to abstaine from these and all other such filthie sinnes and to come with cleare consciences and good hearts to this holy table And as touching meats I wish men to refraine from them when they come to communicate on this sacrament vnlesse it be for some great infirmitie necessitie c. Now
it followeth Iesus tooke bread c. Here the Euangelist sheweth two causes of this sacrament the efficient material cause The efficient cause is Iesus Christ the sonne of God Iohn 1.29 who is the lambe of God that taketh away the sins of the worlde who hath made peace betweene God and vs by the blood of his Crosse Collos 1.20 hath reconciled vs in the bodie of his flesh through death 1. pet 1.18 who hath redéemed vs from our vaine conuersation receiued by the traditions of our fathers neither with gold nor siluer but with his owne precious blood who hath loued vs hath washed away our sinnes in his blood Apocal. 1. â— made vs kings and priests vnto his father euen this Iesus our only Sauiour redeemer hath ordained this holy sacrameÌ„t for vs left it vnto vs in remeÌ„braÌ„ce of his death for a gage of our saluation purchased thereby Wherefore if Iesus Christ and our saluation procured by him be deare and pretious vnto vs then also this sacrament which he hath deliuered vnto vs and instituted for vs to confirme our faith in him ought to be deare and precious vnto vs. Therefore we should be very carefull that neither negligently we absent our selues from it nor vnreuerently come vnto it nor that we make not smal account of it for if we vse to make great account euen of small things which our deare friends leaue vs at the houre of their death in remembrance of them How much more account ought we to make of this sacrament how small soeuer it séeme to the outward eye of flesh blood séeing that our deare redéemer Iesus Christ euen as it were at the houre of his death bequethed and committed it vnto vs and hath left to be a necessary foode vnto our soules that thereby we may dayly more and more grow vp in him But hereof I shall haue occasion hereafter further for to speake when I shal intreat of our dew preparation in comming to receiue this holy Sacrament The second cause touched in these words which is the materiall is bread and wine as after followeth which be the outward matter and elements of this sacrament and be holy signes of Christs blessed body offred and of his pretious bloodshed for vs. And here that we may the better know the true nature and vse of sacraments we are to vnderstand that God in offering to vs our saluation purchased by Iesus Christ vseth two things the one is his words wherein be contained his swéete and pretious promises of mercie grounded founded vpon Iesus Christ the other is externall signes which wée call sacraments be added to the word for seales to seale to confirme vnto our consciences the promises of the word euen to set that before our eyes which the promises of gods word do sound into our eares for we are to marke this that both the promises of the word and also the sacraments lead vs to one selfe same thing that is to Iesus Christ in him only to séeke our saluation for as the word doth this as appeareth by those places before alledged out of Iohn 1.29 Col. 1.20 1. Pet. 1.18 Apocal. 1.5 and infinite such other euen so do the sacraments lead vs as it were by the hand vnto the same liuely set the same before our eyes As for example baptisme doth teach vs to the eye that euen as water washeth away the vncleanesse of our bodies so Christs pretious blood which hee shed for vs cleanseth vs from the filthines and giltines of our sins And this sacrament of Christs supper teacheth and assureth vs that euen as bread and wine féede nourish strengtheÌ„ comfort mans hart so also Christ Iesus who offred his body and shed his blood once for al euen for vs féedeth nourisheth strengthneth comforteth our féeble sinful soules vnto eternal life And these two things his word outward sacraments God hath from the beginning vsed therby to offer our saluation to vs to assure vs of his fauour When God had created Adam Eue and placed them in Paradise he did not onely by word teach and admonish them to serue and honour him their creator but also he did set the trée of life in Paradise which should set before their eyes effectually teach them to imploy that life which they had receiued of God to Gods glorie When God had brought that fearefull floud vpon the world for the horrible corruption wickednesse thereof and did in mercie determine neuer in like manner to destroy it so againe Gen. 9.11 he did not onely assure vs therof by his word and promise but also the more to confirme it vnto vs did set his bow in the clouds that as often as we behold the same we should be assured of the performance of gods promise as euen to this day appeareth When it pleased God to accept Abraham and his séede to mercy he did not onely signifie the same to Abraham by making his couenant with him Gen. â—7 that he would be his God and the God of his séed and that in his séed al nations of the earth should be blessed but also he gaue vnto him the sacrameÌ„t of Circumcision to be a seale of this his couenant to assure them that by that blessed séed Iesus Christ he would circumcise the foreskinne of their hearts and cut away all their vncleanenes And when God as it were renewed this couenaÌ„t to the Israelites when he brought them out of Egypt he did not onely giue his Law vnto them wherein his couenant was conteyned but also ordeyned the passeouer and many other sacrifices to confirme the same vnto them in being holy figures and signes of Iesus Christ to come vpon whom the couenant was grounded Euen so to confirme the new testament and couenant made with vs wherof I made mention before Hierom. 3â— 31 Heb. 8.8 which is the same in substance with the olde but called new because it is renewed vnto vs in Iesus Christ reueiled adorned with greater graces of Gods spirit Christ hath ordeined sacrameÌ„ts in number as S. Augustine affirmeth fewest August Epist ad Ianuar. 118. in obseruation easiest in signification most excellent that is Baptisme his holy Supper And therefore our Sauiour Christ speaking of the cuppe as S. Luke and S. Paul report his words saith 1. Cor. 11.25 This cup is the new testament in my blood that is to say a sacrament and seale of the new testament and couenant of God confirmed vnto vs in his blood And this manner of teaching and delyuering of things by these two kinds of things words obiected to the eares and outward signes to the eyes it séemeth that we by the instinct of nature or rather of God haue in like sort receiued for in conueighing of things from one to an other we obserue the same order As if a man make conueiance of lands or goods he doth it
vnderstand that which I haue spoken You shall not eate this bodie which you sée nor drinke that blood which they shall shead that crucifie mée I commend vnto you a certaine sacrament which being spiritually vnderstood shall quicken you For although it must of necessity be visiblie celebrated yet it must inuisibly be vnderstood Iustinus Martyr saith Iustinus Apol. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 162. that the substance of the sacrament is turned into vs and that thereby our flesh and blood is nourished But it were a great absurdity to say that our flesh and blood is nourished of Christs bodie and blood conuerted into them Therefore it is bread wine which be turned into vs and whereby we are nourished By these places that I alledge no more it is as cleare as the sunne that the godly fathers did nothing at all doubt of this our doctrin but were of this iudgement that the substance of bread and wine remaine still in the sacrament Now it followeth that I shew that this doctrine of the Papists is contrary to the nature of a sacrament the which sufficiently appeareth by that which is before declared for I shewed that a sacrameÌ„t consisteth of two things an earthly and an heauenly the signe the thing signified and that there must be a similitude and agréement betwéene these two or else as I alledged out of Augustine it can be no sacrament Epis 13. for as bread and wine féede strengthen and comfort mans heart and bodie so Christs bodie and blood féed strengthen and comfort our soules Now if there be no bread nor wine then it cannot féede strengthen and comfort vs and then it hath no similitude and agréement with Christs bodie and blood and so by consequent according to Augustines iudgement it is no sacrament And thus the Papists striuing through blinde ignorance to take bread and wine from the sacrament do indéede take away the sacrament it self and so haue nothing but an Idole of their owne Now it remaineth that I proue it to be contrarie to the iudgement of our senses the which néedeth no proofe for who knoweth not that to the eie it is bread and wine to the taste it is breade and wine to the féeling and smelling it is breade and wine and not the body blood of Christ Therefore I conclude that it is bread wine But here me thinke I heare some Papists exclaiming and saying phy for shame that you should vse such Arguments to measure these mysteries by the externall iudgement of our senses I answere that I am nothing at al ashamed of this argument séeing that the best disputer that euer was in the world and that most mightily maintained the truth and confounded his aduersaries vsed the same which was neither Chrisippus nor Aristotle but Iesus Christ the son of God for when he appeared after his resurrection to his disciples and they were abashed affraid Luke 24 37. Ioh. 20 2â— supposing they had séene a spirit he said vnto them why are ye troubled wherefore do doubts arise in your hearts 17. behold my hands my féete for it is I my self Handle me and see for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as yee sée me haue Here we sée that our sauiour proueth by séeing and handling his bodie to be no spirit but a true bodie The same reason doth Tertullian vse against that monster Martion of whom I before spake his words be these Hic primum manus ei iniectas animaduertens Lib. 4. adueâ—â— Martionem necesse habeo iam de substantia eius corporali prefinire quòd non possit phantasma credi qui contactum quidem violentia plenum detentus captus ad precipitium vsque protractus admisserit i. I considering that heere first hands were laid vpon him Christ I must of necessitie determine of his Corporall substance Luk. 4. that he cannot bée thought to be a spirit or ghost who being detained and kept and brought euen vnto the steypie place suffered himselfe so violently to be handled and to that purpose immediatly after alledgeth a verse of Lucretius Tangere enim tangi nisi corpus nulla potest res i. Nothing can touch and be touched but a bodie Therfore either our sauiour Christ and Tertullian vsed a reason that hath no reason which I trust our aduersaries will not say or else our reason is verie strong that trie it by touching séeing tasting and it will appeare to be bread And so much the stronger is this reasoÌ„ for that our said aduersaries caÌ„not shew one example in all the scriptures where one substance by Gods mighty power being changed into an other there was not also an outward change of the qualities and properties thereof to be deserued by the outward senses As when Moses rodde was chaunged into a serpent Exod. 4.3 it was not onely in substance but also in externall shew a serpent so that Moses for feare fled from it Exod. 7.21 When the water in Egypt was turned into blood it was blood not onely in substance but also in external appearance to the eye tast so that the Egyptians could not drinke of it Iohn 2.9 When our sauiour Christ had in Cana of Galile turned the water into wine the gouernour of the feast as soone as he tasted it perceiued it to be verie good wine And therefore this should séeme to be very straunge that here should be such a chaunge or transubstantiation as they terme it of one thing into another and no alteration of any outward qualities to be discerned by the iudgement of the senses This were contrarie to Gods working in all other myracles So that it is hereby euident that this is no such myracle as they imagine as also Augustine flatly affirmeth in his third Booke and 10. Chapt. of the Trinitie Aug. de mirabâ—â— libus Script And the same Augustine writing a particuler booke of all the myracles in the scriptures maketh no mention at all hereof by these reasons before alledged it doth I trust plainely appeare that the substance of bread wine in the sacrament do remaine and continue well then say the Papists it is but bread and we may receiue it as onely a péece of bread Nay not so we teach and beléeue Iustinus Apog 2 Ireneus lib. 4. cap. 34. that it is not to compted nor receiued as common bread and wine but a sacrament of Iesus Christ a seale of Gods promises yea and an effectual instrument of Gods grace whereby Iesus Christ with his righteousnes and al other benefits of his passion is offred vnto vs. And to make this matter more plaine by an example euen as the Queenes maiesties seale ioyned to her Letters pattents is in substance waxe stil but yet not to be reputed as commoÌ„ waxe but to be reuerenced as her maiesties seale and it and the said Letters pattents to the which it is ioyned carry a power
c. 1. Cor. 11.25 I would aske of these men that grate so earnestly vpon the letter and vrge so eagerly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word whether the cup that is made either of siluer gold or wood for by the way as Bonifacius the martyr sometime said B. Rhenanus in Annotat. in Tertull de Corona militis In old times we had wooden Chalices and golden priests but in these dayes we haue golden Chalices and wooden priests be the new Testament No no say they by the cuppe is ment by a figure the thing in the cup. Thus they that haue cried out against figures and figuratiue speeches in the sacramēt and haue scornefully called such as haue vsed them figurators M. Anto. Constantius fol 2. c. tibi saepe are now forced to flée to a figure to forsake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. the expresse words and by the cuppe to vnderstand the thing contained in the cuppe But to graunt them this what is in the cup wine say we blood say they Now to grant them this their owne assertion for disputation sake I will aske them whether blood be the new Testament I suppose they cānot with any forehead or face say that blood is the new Testamēt for what is the new Testament but the new leage couenant which God maketh with vs in Christ Iesus as it is set forth in Ieremie and the Epistle to the Hebrewes in these words Hierem. 31.31 Hebr. 8.10 This is the Testament that I will make with the house of Israel after those dayes saith the Lord I wil put my Lawes in their minde and in their heart I will write them and I wil be their God and they shal be my people I wil be merciful vnto their vnrighteousnesse and I will remember their sinnes and their iniquities no more This promise of mercy is the new Testament And therfore neither wine nor blood is properly the new Testament but a Sacrament a holy signe and seale of the new Testament confirmed vnto vs in the blood not of Oxen or Goats but of Iesus Christ the sonne of God Whereupon I thus reason with the Papists as the Cuppe or that in the cuppe is the new testament so is the bread the body of Christ but neither the cuppe nor the thing in the cuppe is properly the new Testament but a holy signe and Sacrament of the new testament So the bread is not properly the body of Christ but a holy signe and pledge of his body offred vpon the crosse for vs. And this phrase of speach in attributing to the Sacrament the name of the thing whereof it is a sacrament which séemeth so rough in these fine mens mouthes both the spirite of God in the holy scriptures we in our common talke vse to giue too bare naked signes which do not exhibite as sacramēts do the thing signified but barely signifie the same as in the example before alledged by S. Augustine Genes 41.26 the seuen thinne eares of corne and the seuen leane kine are said to be seuen yeares when as they did but onely barely signifie the seuen yeares of famine which were to come Genes 40.11 So also Ioseph saith of the thrée branches of the vine and of the thrée white baskets the thrée braunches be thrée dayes and the thrée white baskets be thrée dayes 16. when they did but onely signifie the thrée dayes wherein the butler should be restored and the baker hanged So S. Paul calleth the wiues vaile or couering of her head 1. Cor. 11.10 her power being but a bare signe of her husbandes power ouer her and many such other examples might be alledged out of the scriptures but these shal suffice In our common speach we vse to call bare pictures by the names of those persons whereof they be pictures Alluding to the pictures which hang in my lord S. Iohns great Chamber So we say this is king Henry the seuenth this is king Henrie the eight this is Francis the french king this is the Lord Cromwal and yet those pictures be not those personages but only and barely represent them Now if we vse to speak thus of pictures which be but bare signes of men and do but only represent the formes shapes of thē How much more may we so speake of this Sacrament and call it the body and blood of Christ being not a bare signe representation thereof but an instrument of Gods grace whereby the bodie and blood of Christ is truly offered to all and effectually receiued of the faithfull children of God to nourish and comfort their soules Yea moreouer the very prophane Poets haue vsed this phrase of spéech as Virgil saith faliere dextras for to breake promise where by Dextras the right hands he meaneth promises made by giuing the right hand Iliad 3. So Homer saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. The Herolds brought from the citie the faithfull othes of the gods two lambs pleasant wine the fruite of the earth And againe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibidem post i. but the gorgeous Harolds brought forth the faithful othes of the gods In which places by the faithful othes are ment the lambs and wine which they slew and powred out in confirmation of those promises made touching the combate betwéene Menelaus and Paris and so Eustathius vnderstanding it expounding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the faithful othes that is the sacrifices Where we sée that the external sacrifices the lambes slaine and wine powred out to confirme those othes that they which did not performe them might be slaine and their blood braines powred out as those lambes and wine were are called the othes themselues These places to this end only I alledge to shew vs that it should not séeme so straunge a thing to attribute to the outward signe and Sacrament the name of that thing wherof it is a sacrament and for the confirming whereof vnto vs it is ordained and vsed But that this exposition of mine or rather of God himselfe as hath béene proued by many places and reasons out of the scripture may plainly appeare to agrée with the doctrine of the auncient and godly fathers of the Church I will set downe some places out of their bookes to be as witnesses to giue testimony to the truth of this doctrine Tertullian saith Lib. 4. aduers Marcionem Christ professing that he did greatly couet to eat the passeouer as his owne for it were vnméete that God should couet that which were an others taking the bread and distributing it to his disciples made it his bodie saying this is my bodie that is to say a figure of my bodie but it should be no figure vnlesse Christs bodie were a true bodie for a vaine or void thing such as is a ghost cannot haue a figure Phantasma Héere Tertullian expoundeth these words This is my body by this that is figure of
my body And by this reason prooueth our Sauiour Christs bodie to be not spectrum or phantasma a ghost or phantasticall body as Marcion that monster blasphemed but a true body like vnto ours because the Sacrament is a figure of it which it could not be except it were a true body But the Papists doctrin in this point sauoreth strongly of Martions blasphemie for to say that Christs body is in heauen and earth yea and in infinite places of the earth at one instant and that the natural real body of Christ is vnder the formes of bread and wine without any forme quality or quantity of a body without breadth length or thicknes what is this but to make it no true body as Martion did And euen so S. Augustine intreating of Christs bodie saith Epist 57. ad Dardanum NaÌ„ spatia locorum tolle corporibus nusqueÌ„ erunt quia nusquam erunt non erunt Tolle ipsa corpora qualitatibus corporum non erit vbi sint ideo necesse est vt non sint i. for take from bodies the spaces of place they shal be no where and because they be no no where they be not at al. Take the bodies from the qualities of bodies there can be no place where they may be and therfore it must of necessitie be that they be not But the Papists attribute neither place nor qualitie to Christs bodie in the sacrament therefore by S. Augustines iudgement they make it no body and so as I said agrée in one with that monster Martian But to returne to my purpose and to shew that the fathers haue expounded those words of our sauiour Christ in that sense which I haue before declared Augustine saith I may expound that commaundement to be put in the signe Lib. cont Adunantum Maneche dist cap. 12. for our Lord did not doubt to say This is my body when he gaue a signe of his bodie In Psal 3. in 1. â—or 11. Again he admitted him Iudas to the feast wherein he commended and deliuered to his disciples a figure of his bodie and blood Ambrose saith De iis qui initiantur cap. 9. In eating and drinking we do signifie the bodie and blood of Christ which were offered for vs. Againe De Conseâ—ra dist 2. cap. Reuera before Consecration it is named an other kind after Consecration the bodie of Christ is signified The gréeke Fathers in like maner call the sacrament a signe figure or token of Christs body Gegory NazianzeÌ„ Apâ—lâ—g pâ—g 1◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how dare he which first hath not offred himselfe a liuely sacrifice offer to God that outward sacrifice which is a signe or example of those great mysteries and the like he hath in his oration vpon his sister Gorgonia Basile saith Pag. 56. In Canâ—â—â—â—â—turgia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath left vnto vs memorials or remembrances of his passion by which commeth saluation which according to his commaundement we propound vnto you So Theodoritus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tell me therfore Dialog 2. those mysticall signes which of the priests bee offered to God of what things be they signes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Lords bodie and blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his true bodie or not of his true bodie or not of his true bodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of his true bodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verie wel for an image must haue a patterne whereof it is an Image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as Painters also do imitate nature and paint the images of those things that be séene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if then the diuine mysteries be signes or figures of a true bodie the bodie of our Lord is yet a bodie not changed into the nature of the godhead but replenished with diuine glory Homil. 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So saith Macarius In the Church is offered bread and wine examples of his flesh and blood These places that I alledge no moe sufficiently shew that it was not straunge to the godlie fathers to call this sacrament a signe token figure and example of Christs bodie and that they vnderstood these words This is my bodie in that sense the bread to be called Christs bodie because it is an holie signe example and pledge of Christs bodie offred vpon the crosse for vs. Now although I may seeme to haue sufficientlie spoken of the true sense and meaning of these words This is my bodie withall to haue opened the true doctrine of this sacrament yet because many men be not as yet satisfied in this point but the popish doctrine of Transubstantiation and carnall presence of Christs bodie vnder the formes of bread and wine sticketh still in their stomaks I haue thought it very néedfull further to prosecute this matter and more particularly and largely to confute the said errors and to lay open the nakednesse and weaknesse of them The false doctrine of the Papists concerning their Transubstantiation which they corruptly gather of those words of our Sauiour Christ consisteth in two speciall points the one in that they say that after the words of Consecration there remaineth no substance of bread and wine but onely the outward accidences thereof as whitenes roundnes c. The other that the very naturall bodie of Christ which was borne of the blessed virgin is there vnder the said formes of bread and wine As touching the first that there remaneth no substance of bread wine I say that this is contrary to the holy scriptures contrary to the writings of the auncient godly fathers contrarie to the iudgement of all our senses contrarie to the nature of a Sacrament lastly such a doctrin as bringeth with it many absurdities Matth. 26.29 That it is contrary to the scriptures I proue it thus Christ saith I wil drinke no more of the fruit of this vine vntill that day that I shall drinke it with you new in the kingdome of my father Our Sauiour Christ heere speaking of his supper and after his supper calleth it the fruit of the vine which is wine and not blood S. Paul saieth the bread which we break is it not the communion of the bodie of Christ 2. Cor. 10.16 S. Paul here not onely saith that bread is the Communion of Christs body but also saith Which we breake Now what do we breake onely accidences without a substance that is an absurd follie or doe we breake Christs body as Pope Nicolas with his counsell compelled that learned man Berengarius to affirme Dâ— Consec dist 2. cap. Ego Berengarius but that is wicked blasphemie Therefore it is manifest that that which is broken is bread and that bread broken is the communion of the bodie of Christ that is as I before declared a Sacrament and pledge vnto vs of our spirituall and yet
true and effectuall communion with Christ Iesus Againe S. Paul saith immediatly after 1. Cor. 10.17 we that are many are one bread and one bodie because we are all partakers of one Bread Againe as often as ye shall eate this Bread 1. Cor. 11.26 and drinke of this cuppe yée shew the Lords death till he come Againe whosoeuer shall eate this Bread and drinke the cuppe of the Lord vnworthely shal be guiltie of the body and blood of the Lord And again let a man therefore examine himself and so let him eate of this bread and drink of â—his cup. Here Saint Paul fiue times callâ—th it bread euen when it is receiued and eaten therfore I conclude that it is bread But here the Papists come in with a craftie cauillation and think they haue found a fine deuise to shift off these plain words of the Apostle they say that saint Paul calleth it bread because it was bread as Aarons rodde being turned into a serpent Exod. 7 1â— and being a serpent is called a rodde Aharons rodde deuoured their roddes I aunswere first that they compare things vtterly vnlike for in the Sacrament there must continue a similitude and agréement betwéene the signe and the thing signified as before out of S. Augustine I declared and therefore the substance of the signe must néeds remaine without which there can bée no such similitude But in this matter there is no such agréement betwéene the rodde and serpent but rather bee cleane contrary and therefore the reason of these two are not alike Secondly I say that because the conuersion of the rodde into a serpent was but temporall for a short time to continue Moses had good cause to call it a rodde because thereunto it was straight wayes to be restored and in the nature of a rod to continue Thirdly let the Papists shew that their bread is so turned into the bodie of Christ as that rodde was into a serpent and then they say something other wayes they proue nothing Lastly I may turne this Argument vpon their owne heads that as Moses called the serpent a rodde when it was not a rodde indéede but a serpent So Christ called the bread his body when it was not indéede naturally his bodie but in substance bread and by his ordinance a sacrament of his bodie And as the Papists will haue Saint Paul to call that bread which they say is not bread so why may not our sauiour Christ call that his bodie which not properly but sacramentally is his body Thus I trust this their cauillation is sufficiently confuted that you plainly perceiue that S. Paul calleth it bread because it is bread The which now Dialog 1 I will proue by the testimonies of the ancient fathers Theodoritus beside that plaine place before alledged where he saith that Christ hath honored the visible signes with the title or name of his bodie blood not chaunging the nature of them but Dialog 2 adding grace to nature hath a more plaine and pregnant place whose words be these Thou art catched in thine owne snares for the mysticall signes after sanctification or consecration leaue not their proper nature but they remaine in their former Substance and figure kind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and be visible and tangible as they were before here not only Theodoritus plain words do affirme the nature and substance of bread and wine to remaine after consecratioÌ„ but also the whole drift of the disputation betwéene the true Christian the Eutican heretike tendeth to the same end But if the doctrine of transubstantiation had beene then in the Church receiued it had most fitly serued for the heretiks purpose that as the bread after consecration is turned into Christs body so Christs bodie after the ascention is turned into the deitie and so the heretike reasoneth but the true Christian answereth that he is catched in his own snare for as bread and wine after consecration are not turned into Christs bodie and blood but remaine in substance as they were before so Christs bodie after his ascention is not turned into the deitie but replenished with glorie and immortality Gelasius a Bishop of Rome writing against the same heretike Eutiches that Theodoritus did and vsing the same reason setteth downe the same doctrine in these words Gelasius contra Eurichen Certe Sacramenta c. i. Surely the sacraments of the bodie and blood of Christ which we receiue are a diuine thing and therefore by them wée be made partakers of the diuine nature and yet it ceaseth not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine and indeed an image and similitude of the bodie and blood of Christ is celebrated in the Accion of the mysteries c. Chrisostome also writeth thus Chrisost ad Câ—esarium Monachum Sicut enim antequam sanctificetur panis c. For as before the bread is sanctified we call it bread but when the diuine grace hath sanctified it by the meanes of the priest it is in déed deliuered from the name of bread and is counted worthy of the name of the lords bodie although the nature of bread doe still continue in it and is called not two bodies but one bodie of the son c. Both the words of Gelasius Chrisostome and also the drift of their discourses tending to the same end that Theodoritus doth most plainly shew that after consecration the substance of bread remaineth euen as after Christs assention the substance of his true body continueth or else these reasons taken from the sacrament do not only not make for them but directly against them yea and plainly make for those heretikes whom they by these arguments séeke to confute Origen also saith Panis ille c. Orig. in Matâ—h cap. 15. That bread which is sanctified by the word of God and prayer according to the material substance which it hath goeth into the belly is cast out into the draught but by the prayer which is ioyned to it according to the proportion of faith is made profitable By which it appeareth that it is the substance of bread and not Christs bodie which were blasphemie to affirme that is so cast out Cyprian saith De vnctione Chrismatis Dedit dominus noster c. Our Lord at the table whereat he did participate his last feast with his disciples gaue with his own hands bread wine but vpon the crosse he gaue his bodie to be wounded by the hands of the souldiers August de consecr dist 2. qui mandu Augustine also saith Quod videtur panis est c. That which is séene is bread and the cuppe which our eies also do shew vnto vs c. He saith it is bread and not séemeth or appeareth to be bread August in psal 98. And in another place Spiritualiter intelligite quod loquutus sum Nen hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis c. .i. Spiritually
that he is God but in heauen in that he is man Againe Ille absens est praesentia corporis August in Psal 127. sed presens vigore maiestatis .i. he is absent in respect of the presens of his bodie but present by the power of his maiesty And again Sursum est dominus c. i. the Lord is aboue August in Ioan. tract 30. but also here is the Lord the truth For the body of the Lord wherin he did rise can be but in one place but his truth is dispersed euery where Againe let good men also take this August in Ioan. tract 50. and not bée carefull for he spake of the presence of his bodie for as touching his maiesty his prouidence his ineffable and inestimable grace that is fulfilled which hée said behold I am with you alwaies to the end of the world But touching the flesh which the word took to it touching that by which he was borne of the virgine apprehended of the Iewes crucified vpon wood taken from the crosse wrapped in clothes laid in the sepulchre reueiled in the resurrection ye shall not alwayes haue him with you Why because he was conuersant with his disciples 40. dayes in respect of his bodely presence they waiting on him seing him but not following him he ascended into heauen and is not here for he is there sitting at the right hand of the father and he is here for he hath not left vs by the presence of his maiestie c. Contr. faustum lib. 20. cap. 11. Againe Augustine saith Christ according to his corporall presence could not be at once in the sonne in the moone Lib. 1. coâ—â— Euticâ—eâ— vpon the crosse Vigilius a godly Bishoppe of Tridente and Martyr giueth most plaine witnesse to this truth saying Nam vide myraculum vide vtriusque proprietatis mysterium c. for sée a myracle sée the mysterie of the property of both the natures The sonne of God according to his humanitie is gone from vs according to his diuinitie he said vnto vs. Behold I am with you alwayes to the end of the world if he be with you how doth he say The day shal come when ye shall desire to sée one day of the sonne of man you shall not sée it But both he is with vs he is not with you for whom he hath left and from whom he is departed in his humanitie he hath not left nor forsaken by his deitie for by the forme of a seruant which he hath taken from vs into heauen he is absent from vs but by the forme of God which doth not depart from vs he is present in earth with vs so he being one and the same is both present with vs and absent from vs. And againe the same Vigilius saith Lib. 4. contr Eutichen Deinde si verbi carnis c. Moreouer if there be one nature of the word and flesh how commeth it to passe that the word being euerie where the flesh is not also founde to be euerie where for when it was in the earth it was not in heauen and for that now it is in heauen it is not in earth and in so much it is not that according to it wée looke for Christ to come from heauen whom according to the word we beléeue to be with vs in the earth Therefore according to your doctrine either the word is conteined in place with the flesh or the flesh is euery where with the word seeing that one nature receiueth not in it selfe any thing contrary and diuers Hitherto Vigilius whereby we may sée how néere the papists ioine with that old heretical Abbot Eutiches condemned in the counsell of Calcidone in confounding the properties of both natures and holding that Christs flesh and body is at one instant both in heauen and earth and in infinit places of the earth Therfore we are not to séeke our sauiour Christ in earth but we must be Eagles to soare vp by faith into heauen and there to eat his flesh drinke his blood S. Paul exhorteth vs to seeke the things that be aboue Colloss 3. â— where Christ sitteth at the right hand of God in which words he moueth vs to seeke the things that be there where Christ is but Christ is aboue in heauen therefore wée must seeke the thinges that bée aboue in heauen and not the thinges that be vppon earth But if Christ bée vpon earth as the Papists teach then either Paules reason is not good or we may seeke the things that he vppon earth which he doth in expresse words forbid vs. But I will prosecute this matter no further onely I will lay forth certaine absurdities that follow of this grosse doctrine of Transubstantiation First If Christs real and natural body be there vnder those formes of bread and wine as they teach then we do with our mouthes receiue and eate the verie bodie of Christ and drinke his blood but this is not onely an absurditie but also wickednesse and impietie as S. Augustine saith August lib. 3. de doct christ cap. 16. whose words are worthy wel to be marked and considered He giuing rules how to vnderstand the scriptures amoÌ„gst others giueth this for one That if the scripture seeme either to command any thing that is euill and nought or to forbid any thing that is good and profitable then it is not a proper speach but a figuratiue The example that he bringeth is this Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood ye shall haue no life in you He seemeth to commaund saith he a horrible and wicked thing Therefore it is a figure commaunding vs to communicate vpon the Lords passion and sweetly and profitably to hide vp in memory that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. In which words S. Augustine not onely condemneth that grosse and Capernaicall eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood which the Papists imagine but also sheweth what it is to eat his flesh and drinke his blood euen faithfully to beleeue and acknowledge in our hearts that his bodie was crucified and his blood shed vpon the crosse for vs. But Pope Nicolas with the Romane counsell enforcing that excellent learned maÌ„ Berengarius to recant and denie the true doctrine which he had mainteyned caused him to confesse as appeareth in the Popes owne decrees the very body of Christ in truth to be handled by the priests hands De consec dist 2. Ego Beringarius manibus sacerd frangi fidelium dentibus atteri and to be broken torne by the téeth of the faithful The which is so absurd and grosse that the very barbarous writer of the glosse vppon that place giueth warning warely and wisely to vnderstaÌ„d Beringarius words or else we may fal into greater heresie then he held An other absurditie is this that if Christ naturall bodie be in the sacrament then our sauiour Christ did eat his owne body
for that our sauiour Christ did eate the sacrament doth appeare by these his words after supper Verely I say vnto you Matth. â—6 I will not henceforth drinke anie more of the fruit of the vine c. And as our Sauiour vouchsafed to be baptized that he might sanctifie Baptisme vnto vs euen so he did receiue this sacrament also to sanctifie it vnto vs and thereby to assure vs the more of our communion fellowship with him Chrisost in Mat. Homil. 83. de Consecr dist 2. cap. nec Moses Et glos in cap. in Christo This both Chrisostom doth flatly affirm and the papists themselues do not deny but plainly confesse in these rude rimes without reason Rex sedet in Coena turba cinctus dnodena Se tenet in manibus se cibat ipse cibo i. The king sitting at his supper with his xii Apostles helde himselfe in his hands and fedde himselfe with the meat of himselfe Now whether this be not an absurditie that our sauiour Christ sitting with his disciples did with his natural body eate his naturall body I will commit it to the conscience and iudgement of the godly to consider And whether it must not hereof follow that he had too bodies one an Actiue that did eate and another a passiue that was eaten An other absurditie hereof ensueth that whereas the papists teach the Christs body is in the sacrament being impassible mortall and glorified contradictories must néeds be affirmed at one instaÌ„t vpon Christs bodie for his body wherein he sate at the table with his disciples was visible but the body in the sacrament inuisible that bodie was passible this impassible that subiect to death which shortly after died vpon the crosse this not subiect to death Now it can no more be that Christs body at one instant should be visible and inuisible passible and impassible subiect to death and not subiect to death then it can be a bodie and no body And therefore this is a foule absurditie Moreouer for Christs body to be at one instant in heauen and earth and infinite places of the earth is as I haue shewed and proued before an absurdity And that Christs bodie should bée in the Sacrament without any accidences of a body as form figure leÌ„gth breadth thicknesse is as I touched before an absurditie This doctrine bringeth an other absurdity which they maintain that wicked men do eat the very body of Christ Whereas Christ himselfe saith Iohn â— 54 whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood 56. hath eternall life and I will raise him vp at the last day And againe he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood 57. dwelleth in me and I in him hée that eateth me shal liue by me But the wicked haue not eternall life neither do they liue by Christ being deade in their sinnes Therefore the wicked do not eat Christs flesh nor drink his blood Augustine saith August in Ioh. tract 26. Huius rei sacramentum id est vnitatis c. The sacrament of this thing that is of the vnitie of Christs bodie and blood is prepared in the Lords table and receiued of the Lords table in some places euery day in some at certaine times of some men to life of some to destruction But the thing it selfe wherof it is a sacrament is destruction to none but life to euery one that is partaker of it Again the same Augustine saith August lib. 21. de imitat Dei cap. 25. Non dicendum eum manducare corpus Christi qui in corpore non est Christi i. we must not say that he doth eate the body of Christ who is not in the body of Christ And againe in the same place Idem ibid. Nec isti ergo dicendi sunt manducare corpus Christi quoniam nec in membris computandi sunt Christi c. Therefore they are not to be said to eat the bodie of Christ because they are not to be counted among the members of Christ for not to speake of other things they cannot at one time be the members of Christ and the members of a harlot Origene saith Est verus cibus i. Orig. in Matth. 15. that is the true meate which no wicked man can eate for if a wicked man could eat the body of Christ it would not be writen He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer These places I do alledge to confute not onely this absurd assertion but also that grosse doctrine of transubstantiation for if the bread be so transubstantiated into Christs body then the wicked do eate Christs body if the wicked do not eat Christs body as by the proofes before alledged doth plainely appeare then is there no such transubstantiation nor carnall presence as they vainely imagine and falsely affirme for to be But heere also they want not a shift which is that the wicked doe eate Christs flesh and drink his blood but not worthily But I would haue them to proue that a man may eate Christs bodie vnworthely In déede I confesse that the wicked may vnworthely eat of this bread drink of this cuppe of the Lords 1. Cor. 11.27 and be guilty of the bodie and blood of Christ as S. Paul saith because that through infidelitie they do reiect Iesus Christ offred therby But that the wicked and reprobate be either worthely or vnworthely partakers of Iesus Christ that I do deny Yet to proue this shamelesse assertion see how they be not ashamed wilfully to corrupt the holy Scriptures Titul 21. Arti. 1. de sumpt Euch. Bunderius a lying and false Frier is not abashed thus to alledge S. Paules place which euen now I brought forth Multi enim indigne accipiunt de quibus ait Apostolus Qui manducat carnem bibit calicem domini indigne iuditium sibi manducat bibit i. For many do vnworthely receiue of whom the Apostle speaketh He that eateth the flesh and drinketh the cuppe of the Lord vnworthely eateth drinketh his owne damnation Heere this deceitfull Frier for panem the bread putteth carnem the flesh that whereas the Apostle saith he that eateth this bread and drinketh this cup c. He maketh him to say he that eateth the flesh and drinketh the cuppe of the Lord vnworthely wherein you sée how he altereth S. Pauls words and corrupteth the place But no maruell for such shamelesse assertions and corrupt doctrin cannot be defended without shame lesse corrupting of the holy Scriptures But they will say the sense and meaning is all one for he that eateth that bread eateth Christs body But that is the question and therefore they vse a deceitfull Argument called petitio principii taking that for graunted which is in question and is denied for the bread is one thing Christs bodie an other And although we are not to seperate Christ from the sacrament yet we ought not to confound them but to distinguish betwéene them for euen as the godly
precious blood shedde vpon the crosse for vs to feede and nourish our soules to eternal life which is not to be done carnally but spiritually yet truely and effectually Now let vs prepare our selues to come reuerently and worthely to this holy sacrament the which that we may do we ought as S. Paul exhorteth vs 1. Cor. 11. to proue and examine our selues and so to eat of this bread drink of this cuppe for he that eateth this bread and drinketh this cup of the Lord vnworthely eateth and drinketh his owne damnation We are therefore not so much to examine others which by confessions priests did in popery as to try our selues to cal our selues to account before god First we must examine our own hearts whether we imbrace and beléeue in our hearts the true doctrine of Iesus Christ sāctified vnto vs in the scriptures sealed with the blood of Christ chiefly whether we rest onely vpon the righteousnesse of Iesus Christ and that we séeke our saluation onely in him who is giuen of God 1. Cor. 1.30 to be vnto vs wisedome righteousnes sanctification and redemption that he that reioyceth may reioyce in the Lord. If we doe not vnfainedly yeld to this true doctrine it is impossible that we can be worthy receiuers of this Sacrament which as I haue declared is ordained and giuen vnto vs to seale and confirme the said true doctrin of our saluation onely by Iesus Christ crucified vnto our hearts and consciences And therefore if any that do not beléeue with his heart and confesse with his mouth this holy and heauenly doctrine but being still frosen in the dregges of wicked superstition and deceiuable errour séeking some part of saluation in mens merits and in their owne works come to receiue this holy mystery and sacramēt they cānot worthely receiue it but doth most wickedly abuse it Doing in like sort as if a man should put her Maiesties seale to such a writing as she neuer allowed graunted nor commaunded but is directly cōtrary to her wil pleasure he that so vseth her seale abuseth her maiesty is a traitour and deserueth to be hanged euen so these men beléeuing erronious and false doctrine such as hath no warrant of Gods word and is iniurious to the death and passion of Iesus Christ the sonne of God whereof this Sacrament is a seale in receiuing it doe horribly abuse it in making it a seale of their damnable doctrine and bée traitors to Iesus Christ and vnlesse God in mercy graunt them repentance will hang in hell for it Therefore such as professe popery or any other wicked heresie and will not reny and forsake to sinne are not to be admitted to receiue this sacrament Exod. 11.43 for if no stranger might receiue the passeouer thē such as be not onely straungers but also enemies to the trueth are not to receiue this our passeouer which is a sacrament of Iesus Christ by whom we haue true deliuerance from eternall destruction and damnation They are therefore first to be instructed diligently in the truth the which if they stubbernly withstand they ought seuerely by the magistrate to bée punished yea and generally al that are to be receiued to communicate of this holy sacrament are first to be catechised and instructed in the true doctrine of saluation and are to be taught what this sacrament is to what end it was ordeined and what comfort and spirituall profit they are to receiue by it Eod. 12.26 So God commaunded the Israelits to instruct their children in the doctrine of the passeouer to teach them the causes wherefore it was ordeined and appointed by God And we reade that when Iosiah did keepe that great passeouer ◠Paralip 35.6 he commaunded the Priests both to sanctifie themselues to prepare their brethren that they might do according to the word of the Lord by the hand of Moses Therefore both parēts ought priuatly to teach their children ministers should publikely instruct the people in all true doctrine and diligently prepare them that they come worthely to the receiuing of this holy sacrament But these things are in a manner vtterly neglected for parents haue no care nor conscience of doing this duty which the Lord layeth vpon them yea most be so blind and so ignorant themselues in gods truth that they be neither able to instruct themselues nor to teach others Ministers for the most part neither preach nor Catechise the people but admit al hand ouer head to this holy sacrament where by it is greatly profaned and abused Some thinke it ynough somtimes to preach but they neither catechise and instruct the people in the grounds and principles of religion nor priuatly examine prepare them to the worthy communicating of this holy mysterie and sacrament And therefore the people come ignorantly and without knowledge vnto it without the which the mind of man cannot be good as Salomon saith Prouerb 19.2 and so most wickedly abuse it and kindle gods wrath against them for it Let therfore parents do this duetie which God laieth vpon them in teaching their children families the true knowledge of god and the right vse of this sacrament Let ministers both publikely preach Christs Gospel and also perticularly catechise and instruct their people in the doctrine of saluation and namely of this Sacrament that they may reuerently worthely for the strengthening of their faith comfort of their consciences receiue it Moreouer euery man that commeth to the lords table must examine his own heart whether he féele the same touched with true repentance and an effectuall remorse for his manifold and haynous sinnes commited against Gods maiesty for as the Israelits were with bitter herbs to eat their passeouer Exod. 12.8 so we ought to receiue this holy sacramēt of Christs body and blood with bitter repentance for our manifold iniquities being inwardly pricked in conscience that wée haue so grieuously offended our gratious God in doing such wicked things as he forbiddeth and not doing those holy things that he commaundeth vs or not doing them in that pure sincere sort that he requireth of vs. This true repentance must bring with it a true amendment and reformation of life in forsaking such sins as we haue heretofore committed and in indeuoring diligently to do those things that wée know to be good acceptable before God our Sauiour Iames. 5.12 He that hath ben a swearer must sweare no more but let his speach be yea yea nay nay lest he fall into condemnation and he must vse his tongue not to blaspheme but to glorifie Gods name and to praise him for his mercies euery morning renewed vnto him Lament 3.23 If any haue béene a prophanour of God Sabboth a neglecter of gods seruice and a contemner of his word hée must forsake these sinnes he must sanctifie the Sabboth day and consecrate it as glorious to the Lord not doing his own wayes nor séeking his owne
Fathers did teach touching the two natures of the deitie and humanity in our Sauiour Christ that they are neither to be distracted a sunder and seperated as did Nestorius nor the properties of them to be confounded as did Eutiches but the said properties are to be distinguished Euen so are we to deale in this matter of the sacrament concerning the signe and thing signified that neither they are to be distracted a sunder deuided nor to be confounded â—ogether but to be distinguished The sign which is the bread and wine are things visible and corruptible which wil in short time putrifie Iesus Christ the thing signified is to our outward eyes inuisible and is incorruptible The bread and wine are vpon earth Iesus Christ is in heauen at the right hand of God The bread wine are receiued with our mouthes broken with our téeth and féede our bodies Iesus Christ is fide digerendus saith Tertullian Tertull. de resurrect carnis receiued and eaten by faith féedeth our soules to liue to God eternally The bread and wine are receiued of all both faithfull and vnfaithfull godly and wicked Iesus Christ is onely receiued of them who be faithful Ephes 3. in whose hearts he dwelleth by faith They that do eate the bread and wine do die not onely this outward death but also many die eternally Iohn 9.51 but he that eateth this bread that came downe from heauen which is Iesus Christ himselfe shal liue for euer Thus a difference is to be put betwéene the externall sacrament and Iesus Christ of whom it is a SacrameÌ„t And yet we must not distract seperate altogether Iesus Christ from the sacrament but beléeue that he is truely offered to all and effectually receiued of those that be gods children and haue a true faith which is the very mouth of the soule whereby they eate his flesh drinke his blood as Christ saith Iohn â— 35 I am the bread of life he that commeth to me shall neuer hunger and he that beléeueth in me shall neuer thirst Now I will onely shew briefly the vncertainty of this doctrin of Transubstantiation Lib. 4. dist 11. cap. Si autem and so I will end this discourse Peter Lombard the master of the sentences writeth thus Si autem quaeritur qualis sit illa conuersio an formalis an substantialis vel alterius generis definire noÌ„ sufficio formalem tamen non esse cognosco quia species quae ante fuerant remanent i. If it be asked what kinde of conuersion that is whether formal or substantiall or of any other kind I am not able to define But yet I know that it is not a formal conuersion because that the formes and shewes which were before do still remaine Afterward he addeth some think that it is a substantiall conuersion saying that one substance is so coÌ„uerted into an other substance that the one is essentially made the other to the which sense the fore alledged authorities do séeme to consent But some do not graunt that the substance of bread is at any time made the flesh of Christ Others be graunt that that which was bread or wine after consecration is the body and blood of Christ Some doe say thus that that conuersion is so to be vnderstoode that vnder those accidences vnder which before was the substance of bread and wine after consecration is the substance of the body blood but others haue thought that the substance of bread and wine doe there remaine and that there also is the body and blood of Christ Hitherto the master of all the Popish schoolemen whose booke of Sentences was of such credite and autority with them that it was more read expounded then the holy bible Whereby wée may plainely sée how vncertaine this their doctrine is and what diuers opinions haue bene of it So Gabriel Byell Gab. Biell in exposit Canonis Missae lect 40. an other great scholeman writeth thus Quomodo ibi sit Christi corpus an per conuersionem alicuius in ipsum an sine conuersione incipiat enim corpus Christi cum pane manentibus substantia accidentibus panis non inuenitur expressum in canone Bibliae Vnde de hoc antiquitus fuerunt diuersae opiniones .i. How the body of Christ is there whether by conuersion of some thing into it or without conuersion there beginne to the body of Christ with the bread the substance and accidences of the breade remaining still it is not found expressed in the canon of the bible Whereupon in old time there were diuers opinions hereof And afterward he rehearseth foure Besides this what if Iohn Fisher bishop of Rochester a great patrone of the Pope and his doctrine doe flatly confesse that this presence of Christs body and blood in the sacrament cannot be proued by the scriptures Ioh. Roffens Episc in defentio Regiae assertionis cont captiuit Babilonicam M. Lutheri N. 8. O. Whose words be these Hactenus Mattheus c. Hitherto Matthew who onely maketh mention of the new Testament neither is there any word here set downe whereby it may be prooued that in our masse there is made a true presence of Christs bodie and blood for although Christ made of the breade his flesh and of the wine his blood it doth not therefore follow that we by vertue of any word here set downe can doe the like when we attempt the same Again he saith Non potest per vllam scripturam probari c. It cannot be proued by any scripture that either a layman or priest as often as he attempteth the same can in like manner make of bread and wine the bodie and blood of Christ as Christ himselfe made séeing this is not conteined in the scriptures And again he concludeth this matter thus Ibid. Ex iis opinor c. By these things I suppose euery man perceiueth that the certenty of this matter depeÌ„deth not so much of the gospel as of the vse and custome which so many ages hath bene commended vnto vs from the verie first fathers Héere by the iudgement of Bishop Fisher this doctrine of Transubstantiation and reall presence dependeth not so much vpon the Gospel as vpon custome that it cannot be proued by the Scriptures whereby we may sée how vncertaine it is So that we may say with Tertullian Nihil de eo constat Lib. de carne Christi quia Scriptura non exhibet .i. We know nothing thereof because the Scripture doth not shew it And againe Lib. de monogamia Negat scriptura quod non notat .i. The scripture doth deny that which it doth not expresse wherefore let vs forsake this doubtful doctrine yea this erronious absurd and false doctrin and let vs imbrace the truth before declared let vs not séeke Christ here vpon earth but let vs lift vp our hearts into heauen there by faith eate Christs blessed body that was offred and drinke his