glory For when I se his vineyard ouergrowen with thornes brambles wedes I know that euerlastyng woâ— apperteyneth vnto me if I holde my peace and put not to my handes tonge to labour in purgyng his vineyard God I take to witnes who seeth the harts of al men thrughly vnto the bottom that I take this labour for none other consideration but for the glory of his name the discharge of my duetie and the zeale that I beare toward the flock of Christ. I knowe in what office god hath placed me to what purpose that is to say to set forthe his word truly vnto his people to the vttermost of my power without respect of ê‘son or regarde of thyng in the world but of him alone I know what accompt I shall make to hym hereof at the last day whan euery maÌ„ shal answere for his vocation and receiue for the same good or yl accordyng as he hath done I know how Antichriste hath obscured the glory of God the true knowlege of his word ouercastyng the same with mystes and cloudes of errour and ignorance thorough false gloses and interpretations It pitieth me to see the symple and hungrye flocke of Christ ledde into corrupt pastures to be caryed blyndfield they know not whether and to be fed with poyson in the stede of holsome meates And moued by the duetie office and place wher vnto it hath pleased God to call me I geue warnyng in his name vnto all that professe Christe that thei flee far from Babylon if they wyl saue their soules to beware of that greate harlot y t is to saye the pestiferous sea of Rome that she make you not dronk w t her pleasaÌ„t wine Trust not her sweet promises nor banket not with her for in steed of wine she wil giue you sower dregs and for meate she will feede you with ranke poisoÌ„ But come to our redemer and sauiour Christ who refresheth all that trewely come vnto him be their anguishe and heauines neuer so great Giue credite vnto him in whose mouth was neuer found gile nor vntruth By him you shalbe clearly deliuered from all your diseases of hym you shall haue full remissyon A pena à culpa Hee it ys that feedeth contynually all that beelong vnto hym with his owne flesh that hanged vppon the crosse and gyueth them drinke of the blud flowyng out of his owne syde and maketh to springe within them water that floweth vnto euerlasting lyfe Lysten not to the false incantacyons sweete whisperinges and craftye iuglynges of the subtyl Papystes wherwith they haue thys manye yeares deluded and bewytched the world but harken to Chryst gyue ear vnto hys wordes whych shall lead you the ryghte waye vnto euerlastyng lyfe there wyth hym to lyue euer as heyres of hys kyngedome AMEN THE FYRST BOKE IS OF THE TRVE AND CATHOLIKE DOCTRINE AND VSE OF the sacrament of the body and bloud of our Sauiour Christe THE SVPPER OF the Lorde otherwise called The holy Communion or Sacrament of the body and bloode of our sauiour CHRISTE hathe beene of many men and by sondry wayes very much abused but speciallye within these fower or fiue hundreth yeares Of some it hathe beene vsed as a sacrifice propiciâ—torye for synne and otherwise supersticiously farre frome the intent that CHRIST dyd fyrst ordaine the same at the beginning doing therin greate wronge and iniurye to his death and passion And of other some it hath beene verye lyghtly esteemed or rather contemned and dispised as a thynge of small or none effect And thus betwene bothe the parties hath been muche variance and contention in diuers places of Christendome Therefore to the intent that this holy sacrament or Lordes supper may here after neither of the one partie bee contemned or lyghtly estemed nor on the other partie be abused to any other purpose than Christe hym selfe dyd fyrste appoynte and ordeyne the same and that so the contention on bothe parties may be quieted and ended the most sure and playn way is to cleaue vnto holy scripture Wherin what so euer is found must be taken for a moste sure grounde and an infallible truthe and what soeuer can not bee grounded vpon the same touchyng our faithe is mans deuise chaungeable and vncertayne And therfore here are set forth the very wordes that Christe hym selfe and his apostle saynt Paule spake bothe of the eatyng and drynkyng of Christes body and bloud and also of the eatyng and drynkynge of the sacrament of the same FYRST as concernyng the eatyng of the body and drinkyng of the bloude of our sauyour Christe he speaketh hym selfe in the .vi. chapiter of saynt Iohn in this wyse Ueryly verily I saie vnto you except you eate the fleshe of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you haue no life in you Who so eateth my fleshe drinketh my bloud hath eternall lyfe and I will rayse hym vp at the laste daye For my fleshe is very meate and my bloud is very drink He that eateth my fleshe and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in hym As the liuyng father hath sent me and I liue by the father euen so he that eateth me shall lyue by me This is the bread whiche came doune from heauen Not as your fathers dyd eate Manna and ar dead He that eateth this breade shall lyue for euer Of these wordes of Christe it is playne and manyfest that the eatyng of Christes fleshe and drynkyng of his bloude is not lyke to the eatyng and drynkyng of other meates and drinkes For although without meate and drynke man can not lyue yet it foloweth not that he that eateth and drynketh shall lyue for euer But as touchyng this meate and drynke of the body and bloude of Christe it is true bothe he that eateth and drinketh them hath euerlasting life and also he that eateth and drynketh them not hath not euerlastynge life For to eate that meate and drynke that drynke is to dwell in Christe and to haue Christ dwellyng in him And therfore no man can say or thynk that he eateth the body of Christ or drinketh his bloud excepte he dwelleth in Christe and hath Christe dwellyng in hym Thus haue ye hearde of the eatynge and drynkynge of the very fleshe and bloud of our sauiour Christ. Nowe as touchynge the sacramentes of the same our sauiour Christe dyd institute them in breade and wyne at his last supper whiche he had with his apostles the night before his deth At whych tyme as saynt Mathewe sayth When they were eatyng Iesus toke breade and when he had geuen thankes he brake it gaue it to his disciples and sayd Take eate this is my body And he toke the cup and when he had geuen thankes he gaue it to theim saiynge Drynke ye all of this for this is my bloud of the new testament that is shed for many for the remission of synnes But I saie vnto you I will not drynke
hensforth of this fruite of the vine vntil that day when I shal drink it new w t you in my fathers kyngdom This thyng is rehersed also of saynt Marke in these woordes As they dyd eate Iesus toke bread and when he had blessed he brake it and gaue it to theim and sayd Take eate this is my body And takyng the cuppe when he had geuen thankes he gaue it to them and they all dranke of it And he sayd to them This is my bloud of the newe testament which is shed for many Uerily I saie vnto you I will drynke no more of the fruite of the vine vntyl that daie that I drinke it newe in the kyngdome of God The Euangelist S. Luke vttereth this matter on this wyse When the howre was come he sat down and the .xii. apostles with hym And he sayd vnto them I haue greatly desired to eate this pascha with you before I suffre For I saie vnto you Hensforth I wil not eat of it any more vntyll it be fulfylled in the kyngdome of god And he toke the cup and gaue thankes and sayd Take this and diuide it amōg you For I say vnto you I wil not drink of the frute of the vine vntill the kyngdom of God com And he toke bread and when he had geuen thankes he brake it and gaue it vnto them sayeng This is my body whiche is geuen for you This dooe in remembrance of me Likewise also whā he had supped he toke the cup saiyng This cuppe is the newe testament in my bloud whiche is shedde for you Hytherto you haue heard all that the Euangelistes declare that Christ spake or did at his last supper concernyng the institucion of the Cōmunion and sacrament of his body bloud Nowe you shall heare what sainct Paule sayth cōcernyng the same in the tenth chapiter of the first to the Corinthians where he writeth thus Is not the cup of blessynge whyche we blesse a comunion of the bloude of Christe Is not the bread whiche we breake a communyon of the bodye of Christ We beyng many ar one bread and one body For we all ar partakers of one bread and of one cuppe And in the eleuenth he speaketh on this maner That whiche I deliuered vnto you I receaued of the Lorde For the lord Iesus the same nyght in the which he was betraied toke breade and whan he had geuen thankes he brake it and sayde Take eate this is my bodye whiche is broken for you Doo this in remembrance of me Likewise also he toke the cup whan supper was doone saiyng This cuppe is the newe testament in my bloude Doo this as often as you drink it in remembrance of me For as often as you shal eat this bread and drinke this cuppe shew forthe the Lordes death tyll he come Wherfore who so euer shall eate of this breade or drynke of this cuppe vnworthily shall be gyltie of the body and bloude of the Lord. But let a man examine him self and so eate of the bread and drynke of the cuppe For he that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drynketh his owne damnation bycause he maketh no difference of the Lordes body For this cause manny are weake and sycke among you and many do sleape By these wordes of Christ rehersed of the Euangelistes and by the doctrine also of saynte Paule whiche he confesseth that he receaued of Christe two thynges specially are to be noted Fyrst that our sauiour Christ called the materiall bread whiche he brake his body and the wyne whyche was the fruite of the vyne his bloud And yet he spake not this to the intente that men shulde thynke that materiall bread is his very body or that his very body is materiall bread neither that wyne made of grapes is his very bloud or that his very bloud is wyne made of grapes but to signifie vnto vs as S. Paule saith that the cuppe is a communion of Christes bloud that was shedde for vs and the bread is a cōmunion of his fleshe that was crucified for vs. So that although in the truth of his humane nature Christe be in heauen and sitteth on the ryghte hande of God the father yet who so euer eateth of that bread in the supper of the Lorde accordynge to Christes institution and ordinaunce is assured by Christes owne promyse and testament that he is a membre of his body and receyueth the benefittes of his passion whych he suffered for vs vpon the Crosse. And lykewise he that drynketh of that holly cuppe in that supper of the Lorde accordynge to Christes institution is certified by Christes legacie and testament that he is mad partaker of the bloude of Christe whyche was shed for vs. And this ment saynte Paule when he saith Is not the cuppe of blessyng which we blesse a communion of the bloude of Christe Is not the breade whiche we breake a communion of the body of Christe So that no man can contemne or lyghtly esteme this holy communion excepte he contemne also Christes body and bloud and passe not whether he haue any felowshyp wyth hym or no. And of those men saynte Paule saieth that they eate and drynke their owne damnation bycause they esteme not the body of Christe The seconde thyng whiche may bee lerned of the forsayd wordes of Christe and saynt Paule is this that although none eateth the body of Christ and drynketh his bloud but they haue eternall lyfe as apereth by the wordes before recited of S. Iohn yet both the good and the bad do eate and drynk the bread and wyne whiche be the Sacramentes of the same But beside the Scaramentes the good eateth euerlastyng lyfe the euyll euerlastyng death Therefore S. Paule saith Whosoeuer shall eate of this breade and drynketh of the cuppe of the Lorde vnworthyly he shall be giltie of the body and bloudde of the Lorde Here sainte Paule saith not that he that eateth the bread and drinketh the cup of the Lorde vnworthyly eateth and drynketh the body and bloud of the Lorde but is giltie of the body and bloud of the Lord. But what he eateth and drinketh S. Paule declareth saiynge He that eateth and drynketh vnwoorthyly eateth and drynketh his owne damnation Thus is declared the summe of all that scripture speaketh of the eatyng and drynkynge bothe of the body and bloud of Christ and also of the sacrament of the same AND as these thynges be most certainly true because they be spoken by Christe hym selfe the author of all truth and by his holy apostle S. Paule as he receaued them of Christ so all doctrines contrary to the same be moste certainly false and vntrue and of all christian men to bee eschued bycause they be contrary to gods word And al doctrine concernyng this matter that is more than this whiche is not grounded vpon Goddes word is of no necessitee neither ought the peoples heades to be busied or theyr consciences
bread bread and wyne wyne and neuer alteryng Christes woordes herein The bread whiche wee breake sayth he is it not the communion of Christes body Nowe I aske agayn of the Papists whether he spake this of the bread consecrated or not cōsecrated Thei can not say that he spake it of the bread vnconsecrated for that is not the communion of Christes body by their owne doctrine And if S. Paule spake it of bread consecrated than they must needes confesse that after consecracion suche bread remayneth as is broken bread whiche can bee none other than very true material bread And straight wayes after sainct Paule sayth in the same place that wee be partakers of one bread and one cuppe And in the next chapiter speakyng more fully of the same matter four tymes he nameth the bread and the cuppe neuer makyng mention of any transubstantiation or remainyng of accidētes without any substaunce whiche thynges he would haue made some mencion of if it had been a necessary article of our fayth to beleue that there remayneth no bread nor wyne Thus it is euident and plaine by the wordes of scripture that after cōsecracion remayneth bread and wyne and that the Papisticall doctrine of transubstantiation is directly contrary to Gods worde Let vs nowe consider also howe the same is against natural reason and natural operacion which although thei preuaile not against Gods woorde yet whan they bee ioyned with Gods worde they be of great moment to confirme any truthe Naturall reason abhorreth vacuum that is to saie that there shoulde be any empty place wherin no substance shoulde be But yf ther remain no bread nor wine the place where they wer before and where theyr accidentes be is fylled with no substance but remaineth vacuum cleane contrary to the order of nature We se also that the wyne though it be consecrated yet wyll it tourne to vyneger and the breadde wyll mowle whyche than be nothynge elles but sowre wyne and mowled bread which could not waxe sowre nor mowly if there were no breade nor wyne there at all And if the sacramentes were nowe brent as in the olde church they bourned all that remained vneaten lette the Papistes telle what is brente They must needes saie that it is eyther bread or the body of Christe But breade saye they is none there Than muste they needes bourne the body of Christ and be called Christbourners as heretofore they haue burned many of his membres except they wil say that accidentes bourne alone without any substaunce contrary to all the course of nature The sacramentall breade and wyne also wyll nourishe whiche nourishement naturally commeth of the substance of the meates and drynkes and not of the accidentes The wyne also wyll poyson as dyuers byshops of Rome haue had experiences bothe in poysonyng of other and beyng poysoned them selues whiche poysonyng they can not ascribe to the moste holsome bloud of our sauior Christ but onely to the poysoned wyne And most of all it is against the nature of accidentes to be in nothing For the definition of accidentes is to be in some substance so that if they be they must nedes be in some thyng And yf they be in nothynge than they bee not And a thousand thynges mo of lyke foolishnesse doo the Papistes affirme by their Transubstantiation contrary to all nature and reason As that two bodies bee in one place and one body in many places at one tyme and that substances be gendred of accidentes onely and accidentes conuerted into substances and a body to be in a place and occupie no roume and generation to be without corruption and corruption without generation with many suche lyke thynges agaynst all order and principles of nature and reason The Papistical doctrine is also against al our outward senses called our fiue wittes For our eies say they se there bread and wine our noses smell bread wine our mouthes taste and oure handes feele bread and wine And although the articles of our faith be aboue all our outward senses so y ◠we beleue thynges which we can neither see fele here smell nor taste yet they bee not contrary to our senses at the lest so contrary that in suche thynges whiche we from tyme to tyme do see smell fele here and tast we shall not trust our senses but beleue cleane contrary Christ neuer made no suche article of our faith Our faithe teacheth vs to beleeue thynges that we see not but it doth not byd vs that wee shall not beleue that we see dayly with our eies and heare with our eares and grope with our handes For although our senses can not reache so farre as our faithe doothe yet so farre as the compas of our senses doeth vsually reache our faith is not contrary to the same but rather our senses doo confirme our faith Or els what auailed it to S. Thomas for the confirmation of Christes resurrectiō that he did put his hand in to Christs side felte his woundes if he might not trust his senses nor giue no credit therto And what a wyde doore is here opened to Ualentinianus Marcion and other heretikes whiche sayde that Christe was not crucified but that Symon Cyreneus was crucifyed for him although to the syghte of the people it seemed that Christe was crucified Or to suche heretikes as sayde that Christ was no man although to mens sightes he appered in the forme of man and semed to be hūgry dry weery to wepe slepe eate drynke yea and to dye lyke as other men doo For if we ones admyt this doctrine that no credite is to be geuen to our senses we open a large field geue a great occasiō vnto an innumerable rablement of most heinous heresies And if there be no trust to be geuen to our senses in this matter of the sacramente why than do the Papistes so stoutely affirme that the accidentes remayn after the consecration whiche can not be iudged but by the senses For the scripture speaketh no woorde of the accidentes of breade and wyne but of the breade and wyne them selues And it is againste the nature and diffinition of accidentes to bee alone withoute any substance Wherefore if we may not truste our senses in this matter of the sacrament thā if the substance of the bread and wyne be gone why may we not then say that the accidentes begon also And if we must nedes beleue our senses as cōcernyng the accidents of bread wine why may we not do the lyke of the substance that rather than of the accidentes Forasmuche as after the cōsecration the scripture saith in no place that there is no substance of bread nor of wyne but calleth them still by suche names as signifie the substances and not the accidentes And fynally if our senses be dayly deceiued in this matter thā is the sensible sacrament nothyng els but an elusion of our senses And so we make muche for their purpose that
is manyfest to euery man that wayeth substantially the circumstances of the place For whan Christ gaue bread to his disciples and sayd This is my body there is no man of any discrecion that vnderstandeth the Englishe tongue but he may well knowe by the order of the speeche that Christ spake those wordes of the bread callyng it his body as all the olde authors also do affirme although many of the Papistes deny the same Wherfore this sentence can not meane as the woordes seme and purport but there must nedes be some figure or mystery in this speeche more than appeareth in the plaine wordes For by this maner of speeche plainly vnderstande without any figure as the wordes lye can bee gathered none other sence but that bread is Christes body and that Christes body is bread whiche all christian eares do abhorre to heare Wherfore in these words must nedes be sought out an other sense and menyng then the wordes of them selues do beare And althoughe the true sense and vnderstandyng of these wordes be sufficiently declared before when I spake of Transubstantiation yet to make the mattier so playne that no scruple or doubt shal remaine here is occasion giuen more fully to intreate therof In whych processe shall be shewed that these sentences of Christ This is my body This is my bloud bee fyguratiue speches And although it be manyfest ynoughe by the playne wordes of the Gospel and proued before in the processe of transubstantiation that Christe spake of bread whan he sayde This is my body lykewise that it was very wine whiche he called his bloud yet least the Papistes shuld say that we sucke this out of our owne fingers the same shall be proued by testimonye of all the olde authors to be the trewe and olde faithe of the catholike churche Where as the schole authors and Papistes shall not bee able to shewe so muche as one worde of any auncient author to the contrary Fyrst Ireneus writyng agaynst the Ualentinians in his fourthe boke saithe that Christe confessed bread whiche is a creature to be his body and the cup to be his bloud And in the same boke he writeth thus also The bread wherein the thankes be geuen is the body of the Lorde And yet agayne in the same booke he saithe that Christe takyng bread of the same sorte that our bread is of confessed that it was his body And that that thing whiche was tempered in the chalice was his bloudde And in the fift boke he writeth further that of the chalice which is his bloude a man is norished and doeth growe by the bread which is his body These wordes of Ireneus be most plaine that Christe takynge very materiall breade a creature of God and of suche sort as other breade is whiche wedd vse called that his body when he sayde This is my bodye And the wyne also whiche doothe feede and noryshe vs he called his bloudde Tertulian likewise in his booke written agaynst the Iewes saith that Christe called bread his body And in his booke against Martion he oftentymes repeteth the selfe same wordes And S. Cyprian in the firste boke of his epistles saith the same thyng that Christ called such breade as is made of manny cornes ioyned togither his body and suche wyne he named his bloudde as is pressed out of many grapes and made into wyne And in his second boke he saith these wordes water is not the bloud of Christe but wyne And agayn in the same Epistle he sayeth that it was wyne whiche Christe called his bloude and that if wyne bee not in the chalice than we drynke not of the fruit of the vyne And in the same epistle he sayth that meale alone or water alone is not the body of Christe excepte they be both ioyned togither to make thereof bread Epiphanius also saith that Christ speakyng of a lofe whiche is round in fashion and can not see here nor feele sayde of it This is my body And Saynt Hierome writynge Ad Hedibiā saieth these wordes Let vs mark that the bread which the Lord brake and gaue to his disciples was the body of our Sauiour Christ as he sayd vnto them Take and eate this is my body And S. Augustine also saith that althoughe we may sette foorthe Christe by mouthe by wrytynge and by the sacramente of his bodye and bloud yet wee call neyther our tounge nor wordes nor ynke letters nor paper the body and bloudde of Christe but that wee calle the bodye and bloudde of Christe whiche is taken of the fruite of the yearth and consecrated by mysticall prayer And also he sayth Iesus called meate his body and drynke his bloudde More ouer Cyrill vpon Sayncte Iohn saith that Christe gaue to his disciples peces of bread saiyng Take eate this is my bodye Likewise Theodoretus saith Whan Christe gaue the holy mysteries he called bread his body and the cuppe myxt with wyne and water he called his bloude By all these forsaid authors and places with manny mo it is playnely proued that whan our Sauiour Christe gaue breadde vnto his Disciples sayinge Take and eate this is my body And lykewise when he gaue them the cuppe sayinge Diuide this amonge you and drynke you all of this for this is my bludde he called than the very materiall bread his bodye and the very wyne his bloudde That bread I say that is one of the creatures here in earth amonge vs and that groweth out of the earth and is made of many graynes of corne beaten into flower and mixed with water and so baken made into bread of such sort as other our bred is that hath neither sence nor reason finally that fedeth and nourisheth our bodies suche bread Christe called his bodye whan he sayd This is my body And such wine as is made of grapes pressed togyther and ther of is made drynke whiche norisheth the body suche wyne he called his bloud This is the true doctrine confirmed as well by holy scripture as by all auncient authors of Christes churche bothe Grekes and Latines that is to say that when our Sauiour Christe gaue bread and wyne to his disciples and spake these woordes This is my bodye This is my bloude it was very bread and wyne whiche he called his body and bloud Now let the Papistes shewe some authoritee for their opinion eyther of scripture or of some auncient author And let theim not constrayne all men to folowe their fonde deuises onely bycause they sai It is so without any other groūd or authoritee but their owne bare wordes For in suche wyse credite is to bee geuen to Goddes worde onely and not to the worde of any man As many of theym as I haue redde the byshop of Wynchester only excepted doo say that Christe called not the bread his body nor wyne his bloud whan he said This is my body This is my bloude and yet in
our bodies be fedde nourished and preserued with meate and drink so as touchynge our spirituall lyfe towardes God we be fed nourished and preserued by the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ and also that he is such a preseruation vnto vs that nother the deuils of hell nor eternall deth nor syn can be able to preuaile against vs so long as by true and cōstant faith we be fed and nouryshed with that meate and drynke And for this cause Christ ordeyned this sacrament in bread wine whiche we eate and drynke and be chiefe nutrimentes of our body to the intent that as surely as we see the breade and wine with our eies smell theim with our noses touche theym with our handes and tast them with our mouths so assuredly ought we to beleue that Christ is our spirituall lyfe and sustinance of our soules like as the sayd bread and wyne is the foode and sustinaunce of our bodies And no lesse ought we to doubt that our soules bee fedde and lyue by Christe then that our bodies be fed and lyue by meate and drinke Thus oure sauiour Christe knowing vs to be in this world as it were but babes and weakelynges in faith hath ordeined sensible signes and tokēs wherby to allure and drawe vs to more strengthe and more constaunt faith in hym So that the eatyng and drinkyng of this sacramentall breade and wyne is as it were a shewyng of Christ before our eies a smellyng of hym with our noses a feelyng and gropyng of hym with our handes and an eatyng chawyng digestyng and feedyng vpon hym to our spirituall strength and perfection Fyftly it is to be noted that although there be many kyndes of meates and drynkes whych feede the body yet our sauiour Chryst as many auncient authours write ordeyned this sacrament of our spyrytual feedyng in bread wine rather than in other meates drinkes because that bread and wyne doo moste lyuely represent vnto vs the spiritual vnion and knot of al faithfull people aswell vnto Christ as also emonges them selfs For lyke as bread is made of a great numbre of graynes of corne grounde baken so ioyned together that therof is made one lofe And an infinite numbre of grapes be pressed togyther in one vessell and therof is made wyne likewyse is the whole multitude of true christiā people spyrytually ioyned fyrste to Christe and then among them selues togyther in one faith one baptisme one holy spyrite one knotte and bonde of loue Sixtely it is to bee noted that as the breade and wyne whiche we do eate be turned into our fleshe and bloude and bee made our very fleshe and very blud and be so ioyned and mixed with our fleshe bloud that they be made one whole body togither euen so be al faithful christians spiritually tourned into the body of Christ and be so ioyned vnto Christ also together among themselues that they do make but one misticall body of Christ as sainct Paule saithe We bee one bread and one body as many as bee partakers of one bread and one cuppe And as one lofe is geuen amonge many men so that euery one is partaker of the same lofe and lykewyse one cup of wyne is distributed vnto many persons wherof euery one is partaker euen so our sauiour Christ whose fleshe and bloud be represented by the mystical bread and wine in the lordes supper doeth geue hym selfe vnto all his true membres spiritually to fede them noryshe them and to geue them continuall lyfe by hym And as the braunches of a tree or membre of a body if they be dead or cut of they neyther lyue nor receiue any nourishement or sustinaunce of the body or tree so lykewyse vngodly wycked people which be cut of from Christes misticall body or be dead membres of the same doo not spiritually fede vpon Christs body bloud nor haue any lyfe strength or sustentation therby Seuenthly it is to be noted that where as no thynge in this lyfe is more acceptable beefore God or more pleasaunt vnto man than christen people to lyue togither quietly in loue peace vnitee and concorde this sacrament doth most aptly and effectuously moue vs thervnto For when we bee made all partakers of this one table what ought we to thynke but that we be al membres of one spiritual body wherof Christ is the head that we bee ioyned together in one Christ as a great numbre of graines of corne be ioyned together in one loofe Surely they haue very harde and stony heartes whiche with these thinges be not moued And more cruel vnreasonable be they then brute beastes that can not be persuaded to bee good to their christian brethren and neighbours for whom Christ suffred death when in this sacrament they be put in remembraunce that the sonne of God bestowed his life for his enemies For we see by dayly experience that eatyng and drynkyng together maketh frendes and contynueth frendshippe Muche more than ought the table of Christ to moue vs so to do Wylde beastes and byrdes bee made gentle by geuyng them meate and drynke why then should not christen men waxe meeke and gentle with this heauenly meate of Christe Herevnto wee bee stirred and moued as well by the bread and wyne in this holy supper as by the woordes of holy scripture recited in the same Wherfore whose heart soeuer this holy Sacrament Communion and supper of Christ wil not kindle with loue vnto his neighbours and cause him to put out of his heart all enuye hatred and malice and to graue in the same all amitee frendshyp and concorde he deceaueth hym selfe if he thynke that he hath the spirite of Christe dwellyng within hym But all these forsayd godly admonitions exhortations and comfortes doo the Papistes as muche as lyeth in them take away from al christen people by their transubstantiation For if we receaue no breade nor wyne in the holy communion than al those lessons and comfortes be gone whiche we shulde learne and receyue by eatyng of the bread and drynkynge of the wyne And that phantasticall imagination giueth an occasion vtterly to subuert our whole faythe in Christe For yf this sacrament bee ordeyned in bread and wyne whiche be foodes for the body to signifi and declare vnto vs our spirituall foode by Christ then yf our corporal fedyng vpon the bread and wine be but phantasticall so that there is no bread nor wine there in dede to fede vpon although they apere there to be than it doth vs to vnderstande that our spirituall feedyng in Christe is also phantasticall and that in dede we fede not of him Which sophistrie is so diuelyshe and wicked and so much iniurious to Christ that it could not come from any other person but onely from the diuell hym selfe and from his speciall minister Antichriste The eyght thyng that is to bee noted is that this spirituall meate of Christ is
Lordes supper is moste manyfest by the plaine woordes of Christe hym selfe whan he ministred the same supper vnto his disciples For as the Euangelistes write Christe toke breade and brake it and gaue it to his diciples and sayde Take eate â–ª this is my body Here the Papistes triumph of these words whaÌ„ Christe saide This is my body whiche they call the woordes of Consecration For say they as soone as these woordes be fully ended there is no breade lefte nor none other substaunce but onlye Christes bodye Whan Christe saide this the breade saye they remayned And whan he sayde is yet the breade remained Also whan hee added my the breade remained styll And whan he sayd bo yet the breade was ther styll But when hee hadde fynyshed the whole sentence Thys is my body than saye they the breade was gone and there remained no substaunce but Christes bodye as thoughe the breade coulde not remaine whan it is made a sacramente But this negatiue that there is no breade they make of their owne braynes by theyr Unwrytten verities Oh good lord howe wold they haue bragged if Christ had sayd This is no bread But Christ spake not that negatiue This is no bread but said affirmingly This is my body not denying the bread but affirming that his body was eateÌ„ meaning spiritually as the breade was eaten corporally And that this was the meaning of Christ appeareth plainly by S Paule in the tenth chap. to the Corinth the fyrste epistle where he speakinge of the same matter saithe Is not the breade whiche wee breake the communion of the body of Christe Who vnderstode the mynde of Christ better than S. Paule to whom Christe shewed his moste secrete counsailes And saint Paule is not afraide for our better vnderstandinge of Christes wordes somewhat to alter the same least we might stande stiffely in the letters and syllables and â—rre in mistaking of Christes wordes For where as our sauiour Christ brake the bread and said This is my body S. Paule saith that the bread which we breake is the communion of Christes body Christ â—aid his body and saint Paule said the coÌ„munion of his body meaning neuertheles both one thinge that thei which eate the breade worthely do eate spiritually Christes very body And so Christe calleth the bread his body as the olde authors report bicause it representeth his body and signifieth vnto them whiche eate that bread according to Christes ordinance that they do spiritually eate his bodye and be spiritually fed and nourished by him and yet the breade remaineth still there as a sacrament to signifie the same But of these words of Consecration shal be spoken hereafter more at large Therfore to returne to the purpose that the bread remayneth and is eaten in this sacrameÌ„t appeareth by the woordes whiche go before the consecration For that Christ tooke bread and brake it and gaue it to his disciples and sayd Take eate All this was done and spoken before the woordes of consecracion Wherfore they must nedes be vnderstand of y e very bread that Christ toke bread brake bread gaue bread to his disciples coÌ„maundyng them to take bread and eate bread But the same is more plaine and euident of the wyne that it remayneth and is dronken at the Lordes supper aswell by the wordes that go before as by the woordes that folowe after the consecracion For before the wordes of consecracion Christe tooke the cuppe of wyne and gaue it vnto his disciples and sayd Drynk you all of this And after the wordes of consecracion foloweth They dranke all of yt Nowe I aske all the Papistes what thyng it was that Christ commaunded his disciples to drynke whan he sayd Drynke you all of this The bloud of Christ was not yet there by their owne confession for it was spoken before the coÌ„secracion Therfore it could be nothyng els but wyne that he commaunded them to drynke Then I aske the Papistes ones againe whether the disciples dranke wyne or not If they say yea then let them recant their errour that there was no wyne remainyng after the coÌ„secracion If they say nay then they condempne the Apostles of disobedience to Christes commaundement whiche dranke not wyne as he coÌ„maunded them Or rather they reproue Christ as a Iuggler which commaunded his Apostles to drynke wyne and whan they came to the drynkyng therof he him selfe had conuayed it away Moreouer before Christ deliuered the cuppe of wyne to his disciples he sayd vnto them Deuide this among you Here would I aske the Papistes another question what thyng it was that Christ commaunded his disciples to deuide among them I am sure they wyll not saye it was the cuppe except they bee disposed to make menne laugh at them Nor I thynke they wyll not say it was the bloud of Christ aswell because the woordes were spoken before the consecration as because the bloud of Christ is not deuided but spiritually geuen whole in the sacrament Than could it be vnderstande of nothyng elles but of wyne whiche they should deuide among them and drynke all together Also when the CoÌ„munion was ended Christ sayd vnto his Apostles Uerely I say vnto you that I wyll drynke no more hencefurth of this fruite of the vyne vntyl y e day that I shal drynke it newe with you in my fathers kyngdome By these wordes it is cleare that it was very wyne that the Apostles draÌ„ke at that godly supper For the bloud of Christ is not y e fruite of the vyne nor the accideÌ„tes of wyne nor none other thing is y e fruit of the vine but very wyne only Howe could Christ haue expressed more plainly that bread wyne remayne than by takyng the breade in his handes and breakyng it him selfe and geuyng it vnto his disciples comaundyng them to eate it And by takyng the cuppe of wyne in his handes and deliueryng it vnto them commaundyng them to deuide it among them to drynke it callyng it the fruit of the vyne These wordes of Christ be so playn that if an Angel of heaueÌ„ would tel vs the contrary he ought not to be beleued And than much lesse may we beleue the subtyl liyng of the Papistes If Christ would haue had vs to beleue as a necessary article of our fayth that there remayneth neither bread nor wyne would he haue spoken after this sorte vsyng all suche termes and circumstaunces as should make vs beleue that styl there remayneth bread wyne What maner of teacher make thei of Christ that say he ment one thyng when his wordes be cleane contrary What christian heart can paciently suffre this contumely of Christ But what crafty teachers be these Papistes who deuise phantasies of their owne heades directly contrary to Christes teachyng and than sette the same abrode to christen people to bee moste assuredly beleued as Goddes owne moste holy worde Sainct Paule did not so but folowed herein the maner of Christes speakyng in callyng of
disease the puttyng away of thyn infection the wipyng away of thy fylthynesse be not seene with thyne eyes but are beleued in thy mynde so lykewyse when thou doest go vp to the reuerende altare to feede vpon spirituall meate in thy faith loke vpon the bodye and bloude of hym that is thy God honour hym touche hym with thy mynd take hym in the hande of thy hart and chiefely drynk hym with the draught of thy inward mā Hytherto haue I rehersed the saiynges of Eusebius whiche bee so playne that no man can wyshe more playnely to bee declared that this mutation of the bread and wyne into the body and bloud of Christe is a spirituall mutation and that outwardly nothyng is changed But as outwardly we eate the bread and drynke the wyne with our mouthes so inwardly by faithe wee spiritually eate the very fleshe and drynke the very bloud of Christe Hilarius also in fewe wordes saieth the same There is a figure saieth he for bread and wyne be outwardly seene And there is also a truth of that fygure for the body and bloude of Christe be of a truthe inwardly beleued And this Hilarius was within lesse than 350. yeares after Christe And Epiphanius shortly after the same tyme saieth that the bread is meate but the vertu that is in it is it that geueth lyfe But if there were no bread at all howe coulde it be meate About the same tyme or shortly after aboute the yeere our Lorde 400. Saynte Iohn Chrysostome wryteth thus agaynst theim that vsed onely water in the sacrament Christe sayth he myndyng to plucke vp that heresye by the rootes vsed wyne as well before his resurrection when he gaue the mysteries as after at his table without mysteries For he saith of the fruit of the vyne whyche surely bryngeth foorth no water but wyne These wordes of Chrysostome declare plainly that Christe in his holy table bothe dranke wyne and gaue wyne to drynke whych had not bene true if no wyne had remayned after the Consecration as the Papistes fayne And yet more playnely Saynct Chrysostome declareth this matter in an other place sayeng The breade beefore it bee sanctified is called breade but whan it is sanctified by the meanes of the prieste it is delyuered frome the name of breadde and is exalted to the name of the Lordes body although the nature of bread doeth styll remayne The nature of bread saith he doeth styll remayn to the vtter and manyfest confutation of the Papistes whiche saye that the accidentes of breadde dooe remayne but not the nature and substance At the same tyme was S. Ambrose who declareth the alteration of breade and wyne into the body and bloud of Christe not to be suche that the nature substance of bread wine be gone but that through grace there is a spirituall mutation by the mightye power of God so that he that worthily eateth of that bread dothe spiritually eate Christe and dwelleth in Christe and Christ in hym For sayeth saynte Ambrose speakynge of this chaunge of bread into the body of Christ if the woorde of God bee of that force that it can make thynges of noughte and those thynges to be ▪ whiche neuer were before much more it can make thynges that were before still to be and also to be chaunged into other thynges And he bryngeth for example here of the chāge of vs in baptisme wherin a man is so changed as is before declared in the wordes of Eusebius that he is made a new creature and yet his substance remaineth the same that was before And saint Augustin about the same time wrote thus That whiche you see in the altare is the bread and the cup which also your eyes do shew you But fayth sheweth further that bread is the body of Christ and the cuppe his bloude Here he declareth foure thyngs to be in the sacrament Two that we see whiche be bread and wine And other two which we se not but by faithe only whiche be the body and blud of Christ. And the same thyng he declareth also as plainly in an other place saiyng The sacrifice of the Church consisteth of two thynges of the visible kind of the element of the inuisible flesh blud of our Lorde Iesu Christe bothe of the sacrament and of the thynge signified by the sacrament Euen as the person of Christe consisteth of God and man forasmuch as he is very God and very man For euery thyng conteyneth in it the very nature of those thynges whereof it consysteth Nowe the sacrifice of the Churche consysteth of two thynges of the sacrament and of the thyng thereby sygnified that is to saye the bodye of CHRISTE Therfore there is bothe the sacrament and the thynge of the sacrament whyche is Christes bodye What can be deuised to be spoken more plainly against the errour of the Papistes which say that no bread nor wyne remaineth in the sacrament For as the person of Christe consisteth of two natures that is to say of his manhod and of his Godhead And therfore bothe those natures remayne in Christ euen so sayth saynt-Augustin the sacrament cōsisteth of two natueres of the elemētes of bread and wine and of the body bloud of Christ therfore both these natures must nedes remayne in the sacrament For the more playne vnderstandyng herof it is to bee noted that there were certayne heretyques as Simon ▪ Menander Marcion Ualentinus Basilides Cerdon Manes Eutiches Manicheus Apollinaris and dyuers other of lyke sortes whyche sayd that Christ was very God but not a very manne althoughe in eatynge drynkynge sleapyng and all other operations of man to mens iudgementes he appered lyke vnto a man Other there were as Artemon Theodorus Sabellius Paulus Samasathenus Marcellus Photinus Nestorius and many other of the same sectes whyche sayd that he was a very naturall man but not very God although in geuyng the blynd their syghte the dumbe theyr speeche the deafe their hearynge in healyng sodeynly with his worde al diseases in raysyng to life them that were dead and in al other workes of God he shewed himselfe as he had been God Yet other there were which seyng the scripture so playne in those two matters confessed that he was both God man but not both at one tyme. For before his incarnation sayde they he was God onely and not man and after his incarnation he ceased frō his Godhead became a man onely and not God vntyl his resurrection or ascension and then saye they he left his manhod and was only God agayn as he was before his incarnation So that whan he was mā he was not God and whā he was God he was not man But against these vain heresies the Catholike faith by the expresse word of God holdeth and beleueth that Christ after his incarnation lefte not his diuine nature but remained styll God as he was before beyng togyther at one tyme as he is styl
treatinge of this mattier of transubstantiation â–ª sheweth playnlye the cause thereof For saith hee the woordes of the Scripture myghte be expounded more easylye and more plainlye withoute Transubstantiation but the churche dydde choose this sense whiche is more harde â—eeynge moued thereto as it seemeth chyefelye â–ª bicause that of the sacramentes men ought to holde as the holy churche of Rome holdeth But it holdeth that breade is transubstantiate or turned into the bodye and wine into the bloode as it is shewed De summa Trinitate et fide catholica Firmiter credimus And Gabriel also who of all other wrote most largely vpoÌ„ the Canon of y â— Masse sayth thus It is to bee noted that although it be taughte in the scripture that the body of Christ is truely contayned and receiued of christen people vnder the kindes of breade and wine yet howe the body of Christ is there whether by conuersion of any thinge into it or without conuersion the body is there with the bread both the substance and accidentes of bread remainynge there styl it is not founde expressed in the Bible Yet forasmuche as of the sacramentes menne muste hold as the holy churche of Rome holdeth as it is written De hereticis Ad abolendam And that churche holdeth and hath determined that the bread is traÌ„substantiated into the bodye of Christe and the wyne into his blood therefore is thys opinion receaued of al theÌ„ that be catholike that the substance of breade remayneth not but really and truelye is tourned transubstatiated and chaunged into the substaunce of the body of Christe Thus you haue hard the cause wherfore this opinion of transubstantiation at this present is holdeÌ„ and defended among christen people that is to saye bicause the churche of Rome hathe so determined although the contrary by the Papistes owne confession appeare to be more easy more trewe and more accordinge to the Scripture But bicause to our Englishe Papistes who speak more grossely herein thaÌ„ y e Pope himselfe affirming that the natural body of Christ is naturally in the bread and wine can not nor dare not grounde theâ— faith conâ—erning transubstaÌ„tiation vpon the churche of Romeâ— whiche although in name it may be called moste holy yet indeed it is the moste stynking doâ—gehill of all wickednes that is vnder heauen and the very synagoge of the deuil whiche whosoeuer foloweth can not but stumble and fall into a pit ful of errours Because I say the Englishe Papistes dare not now stablishe their fayth vpoÌ„ that foundacion of Rome therfore they seeke Fegge leaues that is to say vayn reasons gathered of their owne braynes and authorities wrested froÌ„ the intent and mynde of the authors â–ª wherwith to couer and hide their shameful errors Wherfore I thought it good somewhat to trauaile herein to take awaye those Fygge leaues that their shamefull errors may plainly to euery maÌ„ appeare The greatest reason and of most importance and of suche strength as they thynke or at the least as they pretend that all the worlde can not answere therto is this Our sauiour Christ takyng the bread brake it and gaue it to his disciples saiyng This is my body Nowe say they assone as Christ had spoken these woordes the bread was straight way altered and chaunged and the substaunce thereof was conuerted into the substaunce of his precious body But what christian eares can paciently heare this doctryne that Christe is euery day made a newe and made of another substaunce than he was made of in his mothers wombe â–ª For where as at his incarnation he was made of the nature and substaunce of his blessed mother nowe by these Papistes opinion he is made euery day of the nature and substaÌ„ce of bread wyne whiche as they say be turned into the substaÌ„ce of his body and bloud O what a meruailous Methamorphosis and abhominable heresye is this to say that Christ is dayly made a newe of a newe matter wherof it foloweth necessarily that they make vs euery day a newe Christ and not the same that was borne of the virgyn Mary nor that was crucifyed vpon the crosse as it shall be plainly proued by these argumentes folowyng Fyrst thus If Christes body that was crucifyed was not made of bread but the body that was eaten in the supper was made of bread as the Papistes say than Christes body that was eaten was not thesame that was crucified And againe If Christes body that was crucified was not made of bread and Christes body that was crucified was thesame that was eaten at his last supper than Christes body that was eaten was not made of bread And moreouer If Christes body that was eaten at the last supper was the same that was crucifyed and Christes body that was eaten at the supper was made of bread as the Papistes fayne than Christes body that was crucifyed was made of bread And in lyke maner it foloweth If the body of Christ in the sacrament bee made of the substaÌ„ce of bread and wyne and thesame body was conceiued in the virgyns wombe than the body of Christ in the virgyns wombe was made of bread and wyne Or els turne the argument thus The body of Christ in the virgyns wombe was not made of bread wyne but this body of Christ in the sacrament is made of bread and wyne than this body of Christ is not the same that was conceiued in the virgyns wombe Another argument Christ that was borne in the virgyns wombe as concernyng his body was made of none other substance but of the substance of his blessed mother but Christ in the sacrament is made of another substance than he is another Christ. And so the Antichrist of Rome the chiefe author of all Idolatry would bryng fayfthul christen people froÌ„ the true worshippyng of Christ that was made and borne of the blessed virgyn Mary through the operacion of the holy ghost and suffered for vs vpon the crosse to worship another Christ made of bread wyne through the consecracion of a Popishe priest And thus the Popishe priestes make them selues the makers of God For say they the priest by the woordes of consecracion maketh that thyng whiche is eaten and dronken in the Lordes supper and that say they is Christ him selfe both God and man and so they take vpon them to make both God and man But let all true worshippers worship one god one Christ ones corporally made of one only corporall substance that is to say of the blessed virgyn Mary that ones dyed and rose ones agayne ones ascended into heauen and there sitteth and shall sit at the right had of his father euermore although spiritually he be eueryday amongest vs whosoeuer come together in his name he is in the myddes among them And he is the spiritual pasture and foode of our soules as meate and drynke is of our bodies whiche he signifieth vnto vs by the institution of his most holy supper
as the Papistes do fondly phantasy And likewise the substances of bread wyne do feede and norishe the body of them that eate the same and not the only accidentes In these answeres is no absurditie nor inconuenience nothyng spoken either contrarye to holy scripture or to natural reason Philosophy or experience or against any olde auncient author or the primatiue or catholike churche but onely against the malignant and Papisticall church of Rome Where as on the other syde y t cursed synagoge of Antichrist hath defined and determined in this matter many thynges contrary to Christes wordes contrary to the olde catholike church and the holy martyrs and doctoures of the same and contrary to all naturall reason learnynge and phylosophy And the final end of all this Antichrists doctrine is none other but by subtelty and crafte to bringe christian people from the true honouringe of Christ vnto the greatest ydolatry that euer was in this worlde deuised as by goddes grace shalbe plainly sette forth hereafter Thus endeth the seconde booke THE THIRDE BOOKE TEACHETH THE MANNER HOWE Christe is present in his supper NOW THIS MATTER OF transubstantiation being as I trust sufficiently resolued which is the fyrst part before rehersed wherin the papistical doctrine varieth from the catholicke truth ordre requireth next to intreate of the seconde part whiche is of the manner of the presence of the body and bloode of our sauiour Christe in the sacramente thereof wherein is no lesse contention then in the fyrste parte For a plaine explication wherof it is not vnknowen to all true faithfull christian people that oure sauiour CHRIST beeinge perfecte God and in all thinges equall and coeternall wyth his father for our sakes beecame also a perfect manne takynge fleshe and bloode of his blessed mother and virgine Marye and sauing synne beinge in all thinges lyke vnto vs adioyninge vnto hys diuynitie a moste perfecte soule and a moste perfecte bodye hys sowle beinge indued with lyfe sence wyll reason wysdome memory and all other thinges required to the perfect soule of man and hys body being made of very fleshe and bones not onlye hauinge all membres of a perfecte mannes bodye in due ordre and proportion but also beinge subiect to hunger thyrste laboure sweate werines colde heate and all other lyke infirmyties and passions of man and vnto death also and that the moste vile and painefull vppon the crosse And after his death he rose againe with y e selfe same visible and palpable bodye and appeared therwith and shewed the same vnto hys Apostels and specially to Thomas makinge him to put his handes into his syde and to feele hys woundes And with the selfe same bodye he forsooke this worlde and ascended into heauen the Apostels seeynge and beholdinge hys body when it ascended and nowe sytteth at the right hand of his father and there shall remaine vntyll the laste daye when he shal come to iudge the quick and the deade This is the trewe catholicke faythe whâ—che the scrripture teacheth the vniuersal churche of Christe hathe euer beleued frome the begynnynge vntyll within these fower or fyue hundreth yeares last passed that the Byshoppe of Rome with the assistaunce of his Papists hath sette vp a newe faithe and beliefe of theyr owne deuising that the same body really corporally naturally and sensiblye is in this worlde styll and that in an hundreth thousand places at one tyme beynge inclosed in euerye pyxe and bread consecrated And althoughe we do affirme accordinge to Gods word that Christ is in all persones that truelye beleue in him in suche sorte that with his flesh and bloode he dothe spiritually norishe theim and feede theim and giueth theim euerlasting lyfe â–ª and doth assure them therof aswell by the promise of his word as by the sacramentall bread and wine in his holy supper which he did institute for the same purpose yet we do not a little varye frome the hainous erroures of the Papistes For they teache that Christe is in the breade and wine But we say according to the truth that he is in them that worthely eate and drink the breade and wine They saye that when anye manne eateth the breadde and drynketh the cuppe CHRIST goeth into his mouth or stomake with the breade and wyne and no further But wee saye that CHRIST is in the whole man bothe in the body and soule of him that worthely eateth the bread and drinketh the cuppe and not in hys mouthe or stomacke onely They saye that CHRIST is receiued in the mouth and entreth in wyth the bread and wyne Wee saye that hee is receaued in the harte and entreth in by faithe They saye that Christe is reallye in the sacramentall breade beeynge reserued an whole yeare or so longe as the fourme of breade remaineth but after the receiuynge thereof hee flyeth vp say they frome the receiuer vnto heauen as soone as the breade is chawed in the mouth or chaunged in the stomacke But wee say that Christ remayneth in the man that worthely receiueth it so longe as the manne remayneth a membre of Christe They say that in the sacrament the corporall membres of Christe be not distaunt in place one from another but that wheresoeuer the head is there be the feete and wheresoeuer the armes be there be the legges so that in euery parte of the bread wyne is altogither whole head whole feete whole fleshe whole bloud whole hearte whole lunges whole brest whole backe and altogither whole confused and mixte withoute distinction or diuersitie O what a foolishe and an abhominable inuencion is this to make of the moste pure and perfect body of Christe suche a confuse and monstruous body And yet canne the Papistes imagine nothinge so foolishe but all Christian people must receyue the same as an oracle of God and as a moste certayne article of their fayth without whisperyng to the contrary Furthermore the Papistes say that a dogge or a Catte eate the body of Christe if they by chaunce do eate the sacramental bread We say that no yearthly creature can eate the body of Christ nor drynke his bloud but onely man They say that euery maÌ„ good and euil eateth the body of Christe We say that bothe do eate the sacramental bread and drynke the wyne but none do eate the very body of Christ and drynke his bloud but only they that be liuely membres of his body They say that good menne eate the body of Christ and drynke his bloud only at that tyme whan they receiue the sacrament We say that they eate drinke and feede of Christ coÌ„tinually so long as they be membres of his body They say that the body of Christe that is in the sacrament hath his owne proper fourme and quantitee We say that Christ is there sacramentally and spiritually without fourme or quantitee They say that the fathers prophetes of the olde testament did not eate the body nor drunke the bloud of Christ We
neuerthelesse both present and absent he is all one Christe Hytherto you haue herd Uigilius speke that Christ as concernynge his bodily presence and the nature of his manhode is gone from vs taken from vs is gone vp into heuen is not with vs hath left vs hath forsaken vs. But as concernyng the other nature of his deitee he is styl with vs so that he is bothe with vs and not with vs with vs in the nature of his deitee and not with vs in the nature of his humanitee And yet more clerely doth the same Uigilius declare the same thyng in an other place sayenge If the worde and the fleshe were bothe of one nature seyng that the word is euery where why is not the fleshe than euery where For whan yt was in earthe than verily it was not in heauen and nowe whan it is in heauen it is not surely in yearth And it is so sure that it is not in earth that as concernyng it we looke for hym to come from heauen whom as concernyng his eternall woorde we beleue to bee with vs in earthe Therfore by your doctrine saith Uigilius vnto Eutyches who defended that the diuinitee and humanite in Christe was but one nature either the word is conteyned in a place with his fleshe or els the fleshe is euery where with the worde For one nature can not receaue in it selfe two diuers and contrary thinges But these two thinges be dyuers and farre vnlyke that is to say to be conteyned in a place and to be euery where Therfore in as muche as the word is euery where and the fleshe is not euery where it appeareth playnly that one Christ hym self hath in hym two natures that by his diuine nature he is euery where and by his humain nature he is conteined in a place that he is created hath no beginnyng that he is subiect to death can not die Wherof one he hath by the nature of his worde wherby he is God the other he hath by y ◠nature of his fleshe wher by the same God is man also Therfore one son of God the self same was made the sonne of mā and he hath a begynnynge by the nature of his fleshe and no begynnynge by the nature of his Godheade He is created by the nature of his fleshe and not created by the nature of his Godhead He is comprehended in a place by the nature of his fleshe and not comprehended in a place by the nature of his Godhead He is inferiour to angels in the nature of his fleshe and is equall to his father in the nature of his Godhead He dyed by the nature of his fleshe and died not by the nature of his Godhead This is the faithe and catholyke confession whyche the Apostles taught the martyrs dyd corroborate and faithfull people kepe vnto this daie All these be the saiynges of Uigilius who accordyng to al the other authors before rehersed and to the faith and catholike confession of the apostles martyrs and all faithfull people vnto his tyme saith that as concernyng Christes humanitee whan he was here on erthe he was not in heauen and nowe whan he is in heauen he he is not in earthe For one nature can not bee both conteyned in a place in heauen and be also here in earthe at one tyme. And for asmuche as Christe is here with vs in earth and also is conteined in a place in heauen he proueth thereby that Christ hath two natures in hym the nature of a man wherby he is gon from vs and ascended into heauen and the nature of his godhed wherby he is here with vs in erth So that it is not one nature y t is here with vs that is gone from vs that is ascended into heauen and ther cōteined that is permanēt here with vs in erth Wherfore the Papistes whiche nowe of late yeares haue made a newe faythe that Christes naturall bodye is really and naturally present bothe with vs here in earthe and sytteth at the ryght hande of his father in heauen do erre in two very horrible heresies The one that thei confound his two natures his godhead his manhod attributynge vnto his humanitee that thyng which appertaineth only to his diuinitee that is to say to be in heuen and erth and in many places at one tyme. The other is that they deuide and separate his humain nature or his body makyng of one body of Christ. ii bodyes and ii natures one whiche is in heauen visible and palpable hauing al membres and proportions of a most perfect natural man an other which they say is in erth here with vs in euery bread and wyne that is consecrated hauing no distinction forme nor proporcion of membres whiche contrarieties diuersities as this holy martyr Uigilius saith can not be together in one nature But now seyng that it is so euident a matter bothe by the expresse wordes of scripture also by all tholde authors of the same that our sauior Christ as cōcernyng his bodely presence is ascended into heauē and is not here in yerth And seyng that this hath been the true confession of the catholike fayth euer sithens Christes ascencion it is nowe to be cōsidered what moued the Papistes to make a newe and contrary fayth what scriptures they haue for their purpose What moued them I knowe not but their own iniquitie or the nature and condicion of the sea of Rome whiche is of all other most contrary to Christ and therfore most worthy to be called the sea of Antichrist And as for scripture thei allege none but only one that not truly vnderstāded but to serue their purpose wrested out of tune wherby they make it to gerre sound cōtrary to al other scriptures partainyng to that matter Christ toke bread say they blessed and brake it and gaue it to his disciples saiyng This is my body These woordes they euer styll repeate and beate vpon that Christe sayd This is my body And this saiyng they make their shote anker to proue therby aswell the real and nataral presence of Christes body in the sacrament as their imagined Transubstantiation For these woordes of Christ say they be most playne and most true Than forasmuch as he sayd This is my body it must nedes be true that that thyng whiche the priest holdeth in his hādes is Christes body And if it be Christes body than can it not be bread whereof they gather by their reasonyng that there is Christes body really present and no bread Nowe forasmuche as all their profe hangeth onely vpon these wordes This is my body the true sence and meanyng of these wordes must be examined But say they what nede thei any examinacion What wordes can bee more playne than to say This is my body Truth it is in deede that the woordes bee as playne as may be spoken but that the sence is not so plaine it
was Christe Amonge suche maner of speeches he reherseth those words which Christ spake at his laste supper This is my bodye whiche declareth plainly S. Augustines mynd that Christ spake those woordes figuratyuelye not meaning that the breade was hys bodye by substaunce but by signifycacion And therfore S. Augustine saith Contra MaximinuÌ„ that in sacraments we must not considre what they be but what they signifye For thet be signes of things beyng one thyng and signyfiyng an other Whych he doth shew specyally of thys sacrament saying The heauenly bread which is Christes flesh by some manner of speache is called Christes body when in very deede it is the sacrament of his body And that offering of the flesh whiche is doone by the priestes handes is called Christes passion deathe and crucifiyng not in very deede but in a mystycall signyfycacion And to this purpose it ys both pleasaunt comfortable and profytable to reade Theodoretus in hys Dyaloges wher he dysputeth sheweth at length how the names of thyngs be changed in scrypture and yet thynges remayne styll And for exaumple he proueth that the fleshe of Chryst ys in y e scrypture sometyme called a vaylor couerynge someâ—yme a clothe sometyme a vestiment and sometime a stole the blud of the grape is called Christes blood and the names of breade and wine and of his fleshe and bloode Christe doth so chaunge that sometyme he calleth his body corne or bread and sometime contrarye he calleth breade his body And likewise his bludde sometime he calleth wyne and sometyme contrary he calleth wyne his bludde For the more plaine vnderstandinge whereof it shall not be amysse to recite his owne saiyngs in his foresaid dialogs touchiÌ„g this matter of the holy sacrament of Christes fleshe and bluâ— The speakers in these dialoges bee Orthodoxus the ryghte beleuer and Eranistes his companion but not vnderstanding the right faith Orthodoxus saith to his companion Doest thou not knowe that God calleth breade his fleshe Eranistes I knowe that Orth. And in an other place he calleth his bodye corne Eran. I know that also for I haue heard him saye The hower is come that the sonne of man shalbe glorified and Except the grain corn that falleth in the ground dye it remaineth sole but if it dye than it bringeth forth much frute Orth. Whan he gaue the mysteries or sacramentes he called bread his body and that which was myxt in the cuppe he called bloude Eran. ' So he called them Orth. But that also which was his natural bodye maye well be called his body and his verye bludde also maye be called his bludde Eran. ' It is playne Orth. But oure sauiour without doubt chaunged the names and gaue to the body the name of the signe or tooken and to the tooken he gaue the name of the body And so when he called himselfe a vyne he called blud that whiche was the token of blud Era. Suerly thou hast spoken the truth But I would knowe the cause wherfore the names were chaunged Orthod The cause is manyfest to theim that bee experte in true religion For he would that they whiche bee partakers of the godly sacramentes should not sette their myndes vppon the nature of the thynges whiche they see but by the chaungyng of the names should beleue the thynged whiche be wrought in them by grace For he that called that which is his natural body corne and bread and also called him selfe a vyne he dyd honour the visible tokens and signes with the names of his body and bloud not chaungyng the nature but addyng grace to nature Eran. Sacramentes bee spoken of sacramentally and also by theim bee manyfestly declared thynges whiche all men knowe not Ortho. Seyng than that it is certaine that the Patriarche called the Lordes body a vestiment and apparelle and that nowe we be entred to speake of godly sacramentes tel me truely of what thyng thynkest thou this holy meate to be a tooken and figure of Christes diuinitee or of his body and bloud Era. It is cleare that it is the fygure of those thynges wherof it beareth the name Orth. ' Meanest thou of his body and bloud Era. ' Euen so I meane Orth. Thou haste spoken as one that loueth the trueth for the Lorde when he tooke the token or signe he sayd not This is my diuinitee but This is my body and This is my bloud And in another place The bread whiche I wylle geue is my fleshe whiche I wylle geue for the life of the worlde Era. The thynges be true for they be Gods wordes All this wryteth Theodoretus in his fyrst Dialogue And in the second he wryteth thesame in effect and yet in some thynges more plainly against suche heretikes as affirmed that after Christes resurrection and ascencion his humanitee was chaunged froÌ„ the very nature of a maÌ„ turned into his diuinitee Against whoÌ„ thus he writeth Orth. Corrupcion health sickenes death be accidentes for they go and come Era. ' It is meete they be so called Orth. Mens bodyes after their resurrection bee deliuered from corrupcion death and mortalitee and yet they lose not their propre nature Era. ' Trueth it is Orth. The body of Christ therfore did ryse quit cleane from all corruption and death and is impassible immortall glorifyed with the glorye of God and is honoured of the powers of heauen and yet it is a body and hath the same bygnes that it had before Era. Thy saiynges seme true and accordyng to reason but after he was asceÌ„ded vp into heauen I thynke thou wylt not say that his body was turned into the nature of the Godhead Orth. I would not say for the persuacion of mans reason nor I am not so arrogaÌ„t and presumptuous to affirme any thyng whiche scripture passeth ouer in silence but I haue heard S. Paule crye that God hath ordayned a day whan hee wyll iudge all the worlde in iustice by that maÌ„ which he appointed before performyng his promise to all men raisyng him from death I haue learned also of the holy angels that he wyll comme after that fashion as his disciples sawe him go to heauen But they saw a nature of a certaine bygnes not a nature whiche had no bygnes I heard furthermore the Lord say You shall see the soÌ„ne of maÌ„ come in y â— cloudes of heaueÌ„ And I knowe that euery thyng that menne see hath a certaine bygnes For that nature that hath no bignes can not be seen Moreouer to sytte in the throne of glory and to sette the Lambes vppon his right hande and the goates vpon his left hand signifyeth a thyng that hath quantitee and bygnes Hytherto haue I rehersed Theodoretus wordes And shortly after Eranistes sayth Era. Wee must turne euery stone as the prouerbe sayth to seeke out the truth â–ª but specially whan godly matters be propounded Orth. Tel me than the sacrameÌ„tal signes whiche
be offered to God by his priestes wherof they be signes sayest thou Era. ' Of the Lordes boby and bloud Orth. ' Of a very body or not a very body Era. ' Of a very body Orth. Uery wel for an mage must be made after a true paterne for Paynters folowe nature and paynt the images of suche thynges as wee see with our eyes Era. ' Truthe it is Orth. If therfore y e godly sacramētes represent a true body than is the Lordes body yet styll a body not conuerted into the nature of his Godhead but replenished with Gods glory Era. It cōmeth in good time that thou makest mencion of Gods sacramentes for by the same I shall proue y e Christes body is turned into another nature Answer therfore vnto my questions Orth. ' I shall answere Era. What callest thou that which is offered before the inuocation of the priest Orth. We must not speake plainly for it is like that some be present whiche haue not professed Christ. Era. ' Answere couertly Orth. ' It is a norishmēt made of seedes that be like Era. ' Than howe call we the other signe Orth. It is also a cōmon name that signifieth a kynde of drynke Era. But howe doest thou cal them after the sanctification Orth. ' The body of Christ and the bloud of Christ. Era. And dost thou beleue that thou art made parttaker of Christes body and bloudde Orth. ' I beleeue so Era. Therfore as the tokens of Goddes bodye and bloude be other thynges before the priestes inuocation but after the inuocation they be chaunged and be other thynges so also the bodye of Christe after his assumption is chaunged into his diuine substaunce Orth. Thou art taken with thyne owne nette For the sacramentall signes goe not from their owne nature after the sanctification but continue in theyr former substance forme and figure and may be sene and touched as well as before yet in our myndes we do consyder what they bee made and do repute and esteme them and haue them in reuerence acordyng to the same thynges that they be taken for Therfore compare the ymages to the paterne and thou shalt se them like For a figure must be lyke to y e thyng it selfe For Christes bodye hath his former fashion figure and bygnesse and to speake at one worde the same substance of his body But after his resurrection it was made immortall and of suche power that no corruption nor deth coulde come vnto it and it was exalted to that dignitee that it was set at the ryght hande of the father and honoured of all creatures as the body of hym that is the Lorde of nature Era. But the sacramentall token chaungeth his former name for it is no more called as it was before but is called Christes boyde Therefore must his body after his ascention be called God and not a body Orth. Thou semest to me ignorant for it is not called his body onely but also the bread of lyfe as the Lorde called it So the bodye of Christe we call a godly body a body that geueth lyfe Goddes body the Lordes body our maisters bodye meanyng that it is not a common body as other mens bodies be but that it is the bodye of oure Lord Iesu Christ both god and man This haue I rehersed of the great clerke and holy byshop Theodoretus whome some of the Papistes perceyuynge to make so playnely agaynst them haue defamed sayeng that he was infected with the errour of Nestorius Here the Papistes shewe their old accustomed nature and condition whiche is euen in a manifest matter rather to lye without shame than to geue place vnto the truthe confesse their owne errour And althoughe his aduersaries falsely bruted suche a fame agaynst hym whan he was yet alyue neuerthelesse he was pourged thereof by the whole councel of Calcedon about aleuen hundred yeares ago And furthermore in his boke which he wrote against heresies he specially condemneth Nestorius by name And also all his .iii. bookes of his dialoges before rehersed he wrote chiefly agaist Nestorius and was neuer herein noted of errour this thousande yere but hath euer been reputed and taken for an holy byshop a great lerned man and a graue author vntyl now at this present tyme when the Papistes haue nothyng to answere vnto hym they begyn in excusyng of them selues to defame hym Thus muche haue I spoken for Theodoretus which I praie the be not wery to rede good reder but often and with delectation deliberation and good aduertisement to rede For it conteyneth playnly and brefely the true instruction of a christian man concernyng the matter whiche in this boke we treate vpon First that our sauiour Christe in his last supper when he gaue breade and wyne to his apostles sayeuge This is my bodye This is my bloud it was bread which he called his body wyne myxed in the cuppe whyche he called his bloud so that he changed the names of the bread and wine which were the misteries sacraments signes figures tokens of Christes fleshe and bloude called them by the names of the thinges which they dyd represent and signifie that is to say the breade he called by the name of his very fleshe the wyne by the name of his blud Second that although the names of breade and wyne were changed after sanctification yet neuerthelesse the thyngs them selues remayned the selfe same that they were before the sanctification that is to say the same breade and wyne in nature substance forme and fashion The thyrde seynge that the substance of the bread and wyne be not chaunged why bee then their names changed and the bread called Christes flesh and the wyne his bloud Theodoretus sheweth that the cause therof was this that we shuld not haue so muche respect to the breade and wyne whiche we see with our eies and tast with our mouthes as we shuld haue to Christe hym selfe in whom we beleue with our hertes fele and tast him by our faith with whose flesh and bloud by his grace we beleue that we bee spiritually fedde and nouryshed These thynges we ought to remembre and reuolue in our myndes and to lyfte vp our hartes from the bread and wine vnto Christ that sytteth aboue And bicause we shuld so do therfore after the consecration they be no more called bread wyne but the body and bloud of Christe The fourth It is in these sacraments of bread and wyne as it is in the very bodye of Christe For as the body of Christe before his resurrection and after is al one in nature substance bignesse forme and fashion and yet it is not called as an other cōmon body but with addition for the dignitee of his exaltation it is called a heauenly a godly an immortal and the Lords body so lykewyse the breade and wyne before the consecration and after is all one in nature substance bygnesse forme and fashion and yet it is not called as
other common bread but for the dignitee whervnto it is taken it is called with addition Heauenly breade the breade of lyfe and the bread of thankes gyuyng The fift that no man ought to be so arrogant and presumptuous to affirme for a certayn truth in religion any thynge whiche is not spoken of in holy scripture And this is spokē to the great and vtter condemnation of the Papistes which make and vnmake newe articles of oure faithe from tyme to tyme at their pleasure without any scripture at all yea quite and cleane contrary to scripture And yet wyll they haue all men bounde to beleue what so euer they inuent vpon peryll of damnation and euerlastyng fyre And they woulde constrayne with fyre and fagotte all men to consent contrary to the manyfest woordes of God to these their erroures in this matter of the holy sacramente of Christes body and bloude Fyrst that there remaineth no bread nor wyne after the consecration but that Christes fleshe and bloud is made of them Seconde that Christes body is really corporally substancially sensibly and naturally in the bread and wyne Thyrdely that wycked persones doo eate and drynke Christes very body and bloude Fourthly that priestes offer Christ euery day make of him a new sacrifice propiciatory for syn Thus for shortnes of tyme do I make an end of Theodoretus with other olde auncient writers which do moste clerely affirme that to eate Christes body and to drynke his bloude be figuratiue speches And so be these sentences like wyse whiche Christe spake at his supper This is my body This is my bloudde And meruail not good reder that Christe at y e time spake in figures whan he did institute that sacrament seing that it is the nature of al sacramentes to be figures And although y e scripture be ful of Schemes tropes figures yet specially it vseth theim whā it speketh of sacramentes When the Ark which represented Gods maiestee was come into the army of the Israelites the Philistians said that god was come into the army And God hym selfe sayd by his prophete Nathan that from the time that he had brought the children of Israell out of Egypte he dwelled not in houses but that he was caried about in tentes and tabernacles And yet was not God hym selfe so caried aboute or wente in tentes or tabernacles but bycause the arke whiche was a figure of God was so remoued from place to place he spake of hym selfe that thyng whyche was to be vnderstand of the Arke And Christ hym selfe often tymes spake in similitudes parables and figures as whan he said The field is the worlde the enemy is the dyuell the sede is the worde of God Iohn is Helias I am a vine and you be the brāches I am bread of lyte My father is an husband mā and he hath his fanne in his hand and wil make cleane his flower and gather the wheat into his barne but the chaffe he wyll caste into euerlastyng fyre I haue a meate to eate whiche you knowe not Woorke not meate that perisheth but that endureth vnto euerlastyng life I am good shepherd The sonne of man wyl set the shepe at his right hand and the goates at his left hād I am a doore One of you is the deuil Whosoeuer dothe my fathers wylle he is my brother syster and mother And whan he sayd to his mother and to Ihon. This is thy sonne this is thy mother These with an infinite numbre of like sentences Christe spake in Parables Metaphores tropes and figures But chiefly whan he spake of the sacramentes he vsed figuratiue speches As whan in Baptisme he sayd that wee must bee baptised with the holy ghost meanyng of spiritual baptisme And lyke speeche vsed sainct Ihon the Baptiste saiyng of Christe that he should Baptise with the holy ghoste and fyre And Christ sayd that wee must be borne againe or els wee can not see the kyngdome of God And sayd also Whosoeuer shall drynke of that water whiche I shall geue hym he shall neuer bee drye agayne But the water whiche I shall geue him shall bee made within him a welle whyche shall spryng into euerlastyng lyfe And sainct Paule sayth that in Baptisme wee clothe vs with Christe and be buryed with him This baptisme washing and newe byrth by the fyre and the holy ghoste and this water that spryngeth in a man floweth into euerlastyng life can not be vnderstande of any material water material washyng and material byrthe but by translacion of thynges visible into thynges inuisible they must bee vnderstande spiritually and figuratiuely After thesame sort the mystery of our redemption and the passion of our sauiour Christ vpon the crosse aswel in the newe as in the old Testament is expressed and declared by many fygures and figuratiue speeches As the pure Paschal lambe without spot signified Christ. The effusion of the lambes bloud signified the effusion of Christes bloud And the saluacion of the children of Israel from temporal death by the lambes bloud signified our saluacion from eternall death by Christes bloud And as almightie God passyng through Egipt killed all the Egyptians heyres in euery house and lefte not one aliue neuerthelesse he passed by the children of Israels houses where he sawe the Lambes bloud vpon the doores and hurted none of them but saued them all by the meanes of the Lambes bloudde so lykewyse at the last iudgement of the whole worlde none shall be passed ouer and saued but that shall be founde marked with the bloud of the moste pure immaculate lambe Iesus Christe And forasmuch as the sheddyng of that lambes bloud was a token figure of the sheddyng of Christes bloud than to come and forasmuche also as all the sacramentes and figures of the old testament ceassed and had an end in Christ leste by our great vnkyndnes we should peraduenture bee forgetfull of the greate benefite of Christ therfore at his last supper when he toke his leaue of his apostles to departe oute of the worlde he dyd make a new wyll and testament wherin he bequeathed vnto vs cleane remission of all our synnes and the euerlastynge inheritance of heauen And the same he confirmed the nexte daie with his owne bloud and death And leste we should forget the same he ordeyned not a yerely memory as the Paschall lambe was eaten but ones euery yere but a dayely remembrance he ordained therof in bread wyne sanctified and dedicated to that purpose saiyng This is my body This cuppe is my bloud whiche is shed for the remission of synnes Do this in the remembrance of me Admonyshyng vs by these wordes spoken at the makyng of his laste wyll and testament and at his departyng out of the worlde bycause they should be the better rememored that whensoeuer we do eate the bread in his holy supper and drynke of that cup
wee should remembre howe muche Christ hath done for vs and howe he dyed for our sakes Therefore saith saint Paul As often as ye shal eate of this bread and drinke the cuppe you shall shew foorth the Lordes death vntyll he come And forasmuche as this holy breade broken and the wine deuided doo represent vnto vs the death of Christ nowe passed as the kyllynge of the Paschall lambe dyde represent y â— same yet to come therfore our sauiour Christ vsed the same maner of speeche of the bread and wyne as God before vsed of the Paschall lambe For as in the olde Testament God sayd This is the Lordes Passeby or Passeouer euen so sayth Christ in the new Testament This is my body This is my bloude But in the old mistery and sacrament the Lambe was not the Lordes very Passeouer or passyng by but it was a figure whiche represented his passynge by So likewise in the newe Testament the breade and wine be not Christes very body and bloude but they be figures whiche by Christes institution bee vnto the godly receauers thereof Sacramentes tokens significations and representations of his very fleshe and bludde instructyng their faith that as the bread and wine fede them corporally and continue this temporall lyfe so the very fleshe and bloud of Christ feedeth them spiritually and geueth them euerlastyng lyfe And why shulde any man thinke it strange to admit a figure in these speches This is my body This is my bloude seyng that the coÌ„munication the same nyghte by the Papistes owne confessions was so full of figuratiue speeches For the Apostles spake figuratiuely whan they asked Christ where he would eate his passeouer or passeby And Christe hym selfe vsed the same figure when he sayd I haue muche desyred to eate this passeouer with you Also to eate Christes body and to drynke his bloude I am sure they wyl not say that it is taken proprely to eate drike as we doe eate other meates and drynkes And when Christe sayde This cup is a newe testament in my bloude here in one sentence bee two figures One in this worde Cup whych is not taken for the cup it selfe but for the thynge conteyned in the cup. An other is in this worde Testament for neyther the cuppe nor the wyne contained in the cuppe is Christes Testament but is a token signe and figure whereby is represented vnto vs his Testament confirmed by his bloudde And if the Papists wil say as thei say in dede that by this cup is neither ment the cup nor the wine conteyned in the cuppe but that therby is ment Christes bloud contained in the cuppe yet must they nedes graunt that there is a fygure For Christes bloude is not in proper speche the New testameÌ„t but it is the thyng that coÌ„firmed the new testament And yet by this strange interpretation the Papistes make a very straunge speche more strange then any figuratiue speche is For this they make the sentence This bloud is a newe testament in my bloud Which saiyng is so fonde and so farre from all reason that the foolyshenes therof is euident to euery man Nowe forasmuch as it is plainly declared and manifestly proued that Christe called bread his body and wyne his bloud and that these sentences be figuratiue speeches and that Christe as concernyng his humanitee and bodily presence is ascended into heuen with his whole fleshe and bloudde and is not here vpon earthe and that the substance of breade and wyne doo remayne styll and be receaued in the sacrament and that although they remayne yet they haue changed theyr names so that the bread is called Christes bodye and the wyne his bloudde and that the cause why theyr names bee chaunged is this â–ª that we should lyft vp our hartes and myndes frome the thynges whyche we se vnto the thinges whyche we beleue and be aboue in heauen wherof the bread and wyne haue the names althoughe they bee not the very same thynges in dede These thynges well considered and waied all the auctoritees and argumentes whyche the Papistes fayne to serue for theyr purpose be cleane wyped awaie For whether the authors which they alledge say that we doo eate Christes fleshe and drynke his bloudde or that the bread and wyne is conuerted into the substance of his fleshe and bloud or that we bee tourned into his fleshe or that in the Lordes supper we do receaue his very fleshe and bloudde or that in the breadde and wyne is receaued that whyche dydde hange vppon the Crosse or that Christe hathe lefte his fleshe with vs or that Christe is in vs and wee in hym or that he is whole here and whole in heauen or that the same thynge is in the Chalice whyche flowed oute of his syde or that the same thynge is receaued with our mouthe whyche is beleued with our faythe or that the breade and wyne after the Consecration bee the body and bloudde of CHRISTE or that we bee nouryshed with the body and bloude of Christ or that Christe is bothe gone hence and is styll here or that Christe at his laste supper bare hym selfe in his owne handes These and all other like sentences may not be vnderstanded of Christes humanitee litterally and carnally as the wordes in common speeche doo proprely signifie for so doothe no man eate Christes fleshe nor drinke his bloudde nor so is not the bread and wyne tourned into his fleshe and bloud nor we into hym nor so is the breade wyne after the consecration his flesh and blud nor so is not his fleshe and bloud whole heere in earth eaten with our mouthes nor so dydde not Christe take hym selfe in his owne handes But these and all other lyke sentences whiche declare Christe to be here in earth and to be eaten and dronken of christian people are to bee vnderstande eyther of his diuine nature wherby he is euâ—ry where or els they must be vnderstanded figuratiuely oâ— spiritually For figuratiuely he is in the breade and wyne and spiritually he is in them that worthyly eate and drinke the bread and wyne but really carnally and corporally he is onely in heauen frome whence he shall come to iudge the quycke and deade This briefe aunswere wyll suffice for all that the Papistes can bryng for their pourpose yf it bee aptely applyed And for the more euidence hereof I shall applye the same to somme suche places as the Papistes thynke doo make moste for theym that by the aunswere to those places the reste maye bee the more easyly aunswered vnto They alledge saint Clement whose words be these as thei report The sacramentes of Gods secretes are coÌ„mitted to thre degrees to a priest a Deacon and a minister whiche with feare and tremblyng ought to kepe the leauynges of the broken peeces of the Lordes body that no corruption be founde in the holy place least by negligence great iniury bee done to the portion
Christ. Likewise before the consecration it is called an other thing but after the consecration it is named the bludde of Christe And again he saith When I treated of the sacramentes I tolde you that that thinge whiche is offered before the woordes of Christ is called Bread but when the wordes of Christ be pronounced than it is not called bread but it is called by the name of Christes body By whiche woordes of S. Ambrose it appereth plainly that the bread is called by the name of Christes body after the consecration and although it be styll bread yet after consecration it is dignyfyed by the name of the thing whych it representeth as at lengthe is declared before in the proces of transubstantiation and speciallye in the woordes of Theodoretus And as the bread is a corporal meat and corporally eaten so saith S. Ambrose is the bodye of Christe a spirituall meate and spiritually eaten and that requireth no corporall presence Now let vs examine S. Iohn Chrysostome who in sounde of woordes maketh moste for the aduersaries of the truthe but they that bee familyar and acquainted with Chrysostomes maner of speaking how in all his writinges hee is full of allusions schemes tropes and figures shall soone perceyue that he healpeth nothyng their purposes as it shal wel appeare by the discussyng of those places whiche the Papistes do allege of him whiche bee specially two One is in sermone de Eucharistia in Encaenijs And the other is De perditione Iudae And as touchyng the first no maÌ„ can speake more plainly against them than sainct Iohn Chrysostome speaketh in that sermone Wherefore it is to be woÌ„dered why they should allege him for their partie vnlesse they be so blynde in their opinion that they can see nothyng nor decerne what maketh for them nor what against them For there he hath these woordes Whan you comme to these mysteries speakyng of the Lordes boorde and holy Communion do not thynke that you receyue by a man the body of God meanyng of Christe These bee S. Ihon Chrysostome his owne wordes in that place Than if we receiue not the body of Christe at the handes of a man Ergo the body of Christ is not really corporally and naturally in the sacrament and so geuen to vs by the priest And than it foloweth that all the Papistes bee lyars because they fayue and teache the contrary But this place of Chrysostome is touched before more at length in answeryng to the Papistes Transubstantiation Wherfore nowe shall be answered the other place whiche the allege of Chrysostome in these wordes Here he is present in the sacrament and dothe consecrate whiche garnished the table at the maundy or last supper For it is not man whiche maketh of the bread and wyne beyng set furth to be consecrated the body and bloud of Christe but it is Christe him selfe whiche for vs is crucifyed that maketh him selfe to bee there present The wordes are vttered and pronounced by the mouthe of the priest but the consecration is by the vertue myght and grace of God hym selfe And as this saying of God Increase be multiplied and fyl the yearth ones spoken by God toke alwayes effect towarde generation Euen so the saiyng of Christe This is my bodye â–ª beyng but ones spoken doth throughout all churches to this present and shall to his last commyng geue force and strength to this sacrifice Thus farre they reherse of Chrysostomes wordes Whiche woordes although they sound muche for their purpose yet if they be throughly considered and coÌ„ferred with other places of the same author it shall well appeare that he mente nothyng lesse than that Christes bodye should be corporally and naturally preseÌ„t in the bread and wyne but that in suche sorte he is in heauen only and in our myndes by fayth we ascend vp into heauen to eat him there although sacramentally as in a signe and figure he be in the bread and wyne and so is he also in the water of Baptisme in theim that rightly receiue the bread wyne he is in a much more perfectioÌ„ than corporally whiche should auayle them nothyng but in them he is spiritually with his diuine power geuing them eternall lyfe And as in the first creation of the world al lyuyng creatures had their first life by gods only word for god only spake his word and al thinges were created by and by accordingly and after their creation hee spake these woordes Increase and multiply â–ª and by the vertue of those wordes al thinges haue gendred and increaced euer sithens that tyme euen so after that Christe sayd Eate this is my body Drink this is my bloud Do this hereafter in remembrance of me by vertu of these words and not by vertu of any man the bread and wine be so consecrated that who so euer with a lyuely faithe dothe eate that bread and drink that wine doth spiritually eate drynke and feede vpon Christe syttynge in heauen with his father And this is the whole meanynge of S. Chrysostome And therefore dooeth hee so often saye that wee receaue Christe in baptisme and whanne he hathe spoken of the receauinge of hym in the holy Communion by and by he speaketh of the receauing of him in baptisme withoute declarynge any diuersytee of his presence in the one from his presence in the other He saieth also in many places that we ascende into heauen and do eate Christe sittinge there aboue AND where S. Chrysostome â—nd other Authors doo speake of the wonderfull operation of God in his sacramentes passynge all mannes wytte senses and reason he meaneth not of the workyng of God in the water bread and wyne but of the meruaylous workyng of God in the hartes of them that receaue the sacramentes secretely inwardly and spiritually transformyng them renuyng fedyng comfortyng and nourishyng them with his fleshe and bloud thorough his most holy spirite the same fleshe and bloud styll remaynyng in heauen Thus is this place of Chrysostome sufficiently answered vnto And yf any man requyre any more than let hym looke what is recited of the same author before in the matter of transubstantiation Yet furthermore they bryng for theim Theophilus Alexandrinus who as they alledge saieth thus CHRISTE gyuynge thankes dydde breake which also we do addynge therto praier And he gaue vnto them sayeng Take this is my body this that I doo now gyue and that whiche ye nowe doo take For the breade is not a figure onely of Christes body but it is chaunged into the very body of Christe For Christ saith The bread whiche I wyll geue you is my fleshe Neuerthelesse the fleshe of Christ is not sene for our weakenesse but bread and wyne ar familiar vnto vs. And surely yf we shoulde visibly see fleshe and bloude we coulde not abyde it And therefore our Lord bearing with our weakenes doth reteyne and keepe the forme and apparaunce of bread and wyne
euery side the scripture condemneth the aduersaries of goddes worde And this wickednes of the Papistes is to bee wondred at that thei affirme Christs flesh blud soule holy spirite and his deite to be a man that is subiect to sin and a limme of the diuell They be wonderfull iuglers and coniurers that with certayne woordes can make god and the dyuell to dwel togither in one man and make him both the temple of god and the temple of the diuell It apeareth that they be so blinde that they can not see y ◠light frō darknes Beliall from Christ nor the table of y ◠lord from the table of diuels Thus is confuted this third intollerable errour and heresye of the Papistes That they which be the lymmes of the diuell do eate the very bodye of Christ and drinke his bludde manifestly and directly contrary to the wordes of Christ himself who saith Who so euer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bludde hath euerlasting life But leaste they shuld seeme to haue nothinge to say for themselues they alleag S. Paule in the eleuenth to the Corinth where he saith Hee that eateth and drinketh vnwortheli eateth and drinketh his owne damnation not discerninge the lordes bodye But S. Paule in that place speaketh of the eatinge of the breade and drinkinge of the wine and not of the corporall eating of Christes flesh blud as it is manifest to euery man that wyll read the text For these be the words of S. Paul Let a mā examine himselfe and so eat of the bread and drynk of the cuppe for he that eateth and drinketh vnworthely eateth and drinketh his owne damnation not discerninge the Lordes bodye In these wordes S. Paules mynde is that for asmuche as the breade and wyne in the Lordes supper do represent vnto vs the very bodye and blud of our sauiour Christe by his owne institution and ordinance therfore although he sit in heauē at his fathers right hand yet shuld we come to this mysticall bread wine with faithe reuerence purite and feare as we wold do if we should come to see and receaue Christe himselfe sensibly present For vnto the faithfull Christ is at his owne holy table present with his mightye spirite and grace and is of them more frutefully receaued than if corporally they shulde receaue him bodely present And therefore they that shal worthely come to this goddes bord muste after due triall of themselues considre first who ordained this table also what meate and drinke they shall haue that come therto and how thei ought to behaue themselues therat He that prepared the table is Christ himselfe The meat drynke wherwith he feedeth theim that come thereto as they ought to do is his owne body ▪ flesh blud They that come therto muste occupy their myndes in considering howe his bodye was broken for them and his blud shed for their redemptiō and so ought they to approache to this heauenly table with all humblenes of hart and godlynes of minde as to the table wherin Christe himselfe is gyuen And they that come otherwise to thys holy table thei come vnworthely and do not eat drinke Christes flesh blud but eat and drink their owne damnacion bicause thei do not duely considre Christes very fleshe and blud which be offered ther spiritually to be eaten and drunken but dispising Christs most holy supper do come therto as it were to other meates and drinkes without regard of the lordes body which is the spirituall meat of that table But here maye not be passed ouer the answere vnto certain places of auncient Authors which at the firste shew seeme to make for the Papists purpose that euel men do eate and drink the very fleshe and bludde of Christe But if those places be truely and throughely waied it shall appeare that not one of theym maketh for theyr errour that euel men do eat Christes very body The first place is of S. Augustin contra Cresconium grāmaticum wher he saith that although Christ himselfe say He that eateth not my fleshe and drinketh not my bludde shall not haue lyfe in him yet doth not his apostels teache that the same is pernicious to theim whiche vse it not well for hee saith Whosoeuer eateth the bread and drinketh the cuppe of the Lorde vnworthely shalbe gylty of the body and bloud of the Lorde In whiche wordes S. Augustyne seemeth to conclude that aswell the euil as the good do eat the body and bloud of Christ although the euil haue no benefite but hurt therby But consider the place of S. Augustyne diligently and then it shall euidently appeare that he ment nat of the eatyng of Christes body but of the sacrament therof For the intent of sainct Augustyne there is to proue that good thinges auaile not to suche persons as do euil vse them and that many thynges whiche of them selues be good and be good to some yet to other some they bee not good As that light is good for whole eyes and hurteth soore eyes that meate whiche is good for some is euil for other some One medicine healeth some and maketh other sicke One harnes doth arme one and combreth another one coate is mete for one to straight for another And after other examples at the last S. Augustyne sheweth the same to bee true in the sacramentes both of Baptisme and of the Lordes body whiche he sayth do profite onely them that receiue the same worthely And the wordes of sainct Paule which sainct Augustyne citeth do speake of the sacramental bread and cuppe not of the body and bloud And yet sainct Augustyne calleth the bread and the cuppe the fleshe and bloud not that they be so in dede but that they so signifie As he sayth in another place contra Maximinum In sacramētes sayth he is to be considered not what they be but what they shewe For they be signes of other thynges beyng one thyng and signifiyng another Therfore as in baptisme those that come faynedly and those that come vnfaynedly both bee washed with the sacramental water but both be not washed with the holy ghost clothed with Christ so in the Lordes supper bothe eate and drynke the sacramental bread wyne but bothe eate not Christ himselfe and bee fedde with his fleshe and bloud but those only which worthely receiue the sacrament And this answere wyll serue to another place of sainct Augustyne against the Donatistes where he sayth that Iudas receiued the body and bloud of the Lorde For as S. Augustyne in that place speaketh of the sacrament of Baptisme so doth he speake of the sacrament of the body and bloud whiche neuerthelesse he calleth the body and bloud because they signifie and represent vnto vs the very body fleshe and bloud And as before is at length declared a figure hath the name of the thyng that is signifyed thereby As a mannes ymage is called a man a Lyons image a
the body is called Meate and drynke of a lyke sor the scripture calleth the same thynge that comforteth the soule Meate and drynke Wherfore as heâ—e before in the fyrste note is declared the hungre and drought of the soule so is it nowe secondly to bee noted what is the meate drynke and foode of the soule The meate drynke foode and refreshynge of the soule is our sauiour Christe as he sayd him selfe Come vnto me all you that trauayle and bee laden and I will refreshe you And Yf any man be drye saieth he let hym come to me and drynke He that beleueth in me flouddes of water of life shall flowe out of his bealy And I am the bread of life sayth Christ He that commeth to me shal not be hungry and he that beleueth in me shal neuer be dry For as meate and drynke do comfort the hungry body so doth the death of Christes body the sheddyng of his bloud comforte the soule when she is after her sort hungry What thyng is it that comforteth norisheth the body Forsooth meate and drynke By what meanes than shall we call the body and bloud of our sauiour Christe whiche doo comforte and nouryshe the hungrye soule but by the names of meate and drynke And this similitude caused our sauiour to say My fleshe is very meate and my bloud is very drynke For there is no kynde of meate that is comfortable to the soule but onely the death of Christes blessed body nor no kynde of drynke that can quenche her thyrst but only the bloudsheddyng of our sauiour Christe whiche was shed for her offences For as there is a carnall generation and a carnal feedyng nourishement so is there also a spiritual generation and a spiritual feadyng And as euery maÌ„ by carnal generation of father and mother is carnally begotten and born vnto this mortall lyfe so is euery good christiaÌ„ spiritually borne by Christ vnto eternall life And as euery man is carnally fedde and nourished in his body by meate drynke euen so is euery good christian man spiritually fedde and nourished in his soule by the fleshe and bloud of our sauiour Christ. And as the body liueth by meate and drynke and thereby increaseth and groweth froÌ„ a yong babe vnto a perfect man whiche thyng experience teacheth vs so the soule lyueth by Christe him selfe by pure fayth eatyng his fleshe and drynkyng his bloud And this Christ him selfe teacheth vs in the sixt of Ihon saiyng Uerely verely I say vnto you excepte ye eate the fleshe of the sonne of man and drynke his bloud you haue no life in you who so eateth my fleshe and drynketh my bloud hath eternal life and I wyl raise him vp at the last day For my fleshe is very meate and my bloud is very drynke He that eateth my fleshe drynketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him As the liuyng father hath sent me and I liue by the father euen so he that eateth me shal liue by me And this S. Paule confessed of him selfe saiyng That I haue life I haue it by fayth in the sonne of God And nowe it is not I that liue but Christ lyueth in me The third thyng to be noted is this that although our sauiour Christ resembleth his fleshe and bloud to meat drynke yet he farre passeth and excelleth all corporall meates and drynkes For although corporall meates and drynkes do norishe and continue our life here in this world yet they begyn not our lyfe For the beginnyng of our life we haue of our fathers and mothers and the meate after we be begotten dothe feede and nourishe vs and so preserueth vs for a time But our sauiour Christ is bothe the first beginner of our spiritual lyfe who first begetteth vs vnto God his father and also afterward he is our lyuely foode and nourishement Moreouer meate and drinke doth fede and norishe onely our bodies but Christ is the true and perfect norishement both of body and soule And besides that bodily food preserueth the lyfe but for a tyme but Chrst is such a spirytual and perfect foode that he preserueth both body soule for euer As he said vnto Martha I am resurrection and life He that beleueth in me although he dye yet shall he lyue And he that liueth and beleueth in me shall not dye for euer Fourthly it is to be noted that the true knowlege of these thynges is the true knowlege of Christ and to teache these thynges is to teache Christe and the beleuyng and feelyng of these thynges is the beleuyng and felyng of Christe in our hartes And the more clerely we see vnderstande and beleeue these thynges the more clerely we se and vnderstande Christ and haue more fully our faithe and comfort in hym And although our carnall generation oure carnall nourishement be knowen to all men by dayly experience and by oure common senses yet this our spirituall generation and our spirituall nutrition be so obscure and hyd vnto vs that we can not attayn to the true and perfecte knowledge and feelyng of theym but onely by faith whyche muste bee grounded vpon Gods moste holy worde and sacramentes AND for this consideration our Sauioure Christe hath not onely sette forth these thynges moste playnly in his holy woorde that we maie heare them with our eares but he hath also ordeyned one visible sacrament of spiritual regeneration in water and an other visible sacrament of spiritual norishment in bread and wine to the intente that as muche as is possible for man we may se Christ with our eies smell him at our nose taste hym with our mouthes grope hym with our handes and perceue him with all our senses For as the word of god preched putteth Christ into our eares so likewyse these elements of water bread and wine ioyned to gods word do after a sacrameÌ„tal maner put Christ in to our eies mouthes handes and al our senses And for this cause Christ ordeyned baptisme in water that as surely as we se fele and touch water with our bodies and be washed with water so assuredly ought we to beleue whan we be baptised that Christ is veryly present with vs and that by hym we bee newly borne agayn spiritually and washed from our synnes and grafted in the stocke of Christes own body and be apparailed clothed and harnessed with hym in suche wyse that as the dyuel hath no power agaynst Christe so hath he none against vs so long as we remayne grafted in that stocke and be clothed with that apparel and harnesed with that armour So that the washyng in water of baptisme is as it wer shewyng of Christ before our eyes and a sensible touchyng feelyng and gropyng of hym to the confirmation of the inwarde faithe whiche we haue in hym And in lyke maner Christ ordeined the sacrament of his body and bloud in bread and wine to preach vnto vs that as
body and blud is not receaued in the mouthe and digested in the stomacke as corporall meates and drynkes commonly bee but it is receaued with a pure harte and a sincere faithe And the trewe eatyng and drinking of the sayd body and bloude of Christ ys wyth a constant and a lyuely faith to beeleue that Chryste gaue hys bodye and shedde hys bloude vppon the Crosse for vs and that he doeth so ioyne and incorporate himselfe to vs that hee is our heade and wee his membrâ—s and fleshe of his fleshe and bone of his bones hauinge hym dwellynge in vs and wee in hym And herein standeth the whole effecte and strength of this sacrament And this faith God woorketh in wardely in our hartes by hys holy spirite and confyrmeth the same outwardly to our eares by hearinge of hys woorde and to our other senses by eatynge and drynkynge of the sacramentall breade and wyne in hys holy supper What thynge then can be more comfortable to vs than to eate thys meate and drynke thys drynke Wherby Christ certyfyeth vs that we bee spirytually and trewely fedde and nouryshed by hym and that wee dwell in hym and he in vs. Canne this bee shewed vnto vs more playnly than whan he saith hym selfe He that eateth me shall lyue by me Wherfore whosoeuer doth not contemne the euerlasting lyfe how can he but highely esteme this sacrament How can he but imbrace it as a sure pledge of his saluacion And whan hee seeth godly people deuoutly receaue the same howe can he but be desyrous oftentymes to receiue it with them Surely no man that wel vnderstandeth and diligently wayeth these things can bee without a greate desire to come to thys holy supper All men desyre to haue goddes fauoure and when they knowe the contrary that they be in his indignacion and caste out of his fauoure what thinge can comforte them Nowe be theyr myndes vexed What trouble is in their consciences All goddes creatures seme to be against them and do make theym afraide as thinges being ministers of goddes wrath and indignacion towards them And rest and comfort caÌ„ they finde none neither within them not withoute them And in this case thei do hate as well God as the diuel God as an vnmerciful and extreme iudge and the dyuell as a moste malicious and â—ruel tormentour And in this sorowful heauines holy scripture teacheth theim that our heauenly father can by no meanes be pleased with theim againe but by the sacrifice and deathe of his only begotten sonne whereby God hathe made a perpetuall amitee and peace with vs doth pardon the sinnes of them that beleue in him maketh theim his chyldren giueth them to his first begotten son Christe to be incorporate into him to be saued by him and to be made heires of heuen with him And in the receauing of the holy supper of our Lorde wee bee putte in remembraunce of this his deathe and of the whole mysterye of our redemption In the which supper is made mention of his testamente and of the aforesayde Communion of vs with Christe and of the remission of oure sinnes by his sacrifice vppon the crosse Wherefore in this sacrament yf it be rightly receaued with a true faithe we bee assured that our sinnes bee forgiuen and the leage of peace and the testament of God is confirmed betwene hym and vs so that who so euer by a true faithe doth eate Christes flesh and drinke his bludde hath euerlastinge lyfe by hym Whiche thynge when wee feele in oure hartes at the receauynge of the Lordes supper what thing can be more ioyfull more plesaunte or more comfortable vnto vs All this to bee trewe is moste certaine by the woordes of Christe hym selfe whanne hee dydde fyrst institute his holy supper the nyght beefore his deathe as it appeareth as well by the woordes of the Euangelistes as of S. Paule Dooe thys saythe Christe as often as you drynke it in remembraunce of me And Saint Paule saithe As often as you eate this breade and drynke this cuppe you shall shewe the Lordes death vntyll he come And againe Christ saide This cup is a newe testament in mine owne bloud whiche shal be shed for the remission of sinnes This doctrine here recited maye suffice for all that be humble and godly and seek nothing that is superfluous but that is necessarye and profitable And therefore vnto suche persones may bee made here an ende of this booke But vnto them that be contencious Papists ydolaters nothing is enough And yet bicause thei shall not glory in their subtile inuencions and deceiuable doctrine as though no man were able to answere them I shall desire the readers of pacience to suffre me a litell while to spend some time in vaine to confute their most vaine vanities And yet the time shall not bee altogither spent in vaine for there by shall more clearly appeare the lyghte frome the darkenes the truth from false sophisticall subtelties and the certaine word of God from mens dreames and phantasticall inuentions BUt these things can not manifestly appear to the reader except the principall pointes be first set out wherin the Papistes vary froÌ„ the truth of Gods worde whiche be chiefely fower Fyrst the Papisâ—s say that in the supper of the Lorde after the words of consecracion as they call it there is none other substaunce remaynyng but the substaunce of Christes fleshe and blud so that there remaineth neither bread to be eaten nor wyne to be dronken And althoughe there be the colour of bread wyne the sauour the smell the bygnes the fashion and all other as they call them accidentes or qualities and quaÌ„tities of bread and wyne yet say they there is no very bread nor wyne but they bee turned into the fleshe bloud of Christ. And this coÌ„uersion they call Transubstantion that is to say turnyng of one substaÌ„ce into another substaÌ„ce And although all the accidentes bothe of the bread and wyne remayne styl yet say they the same accidentes be in no maner of thyng but hang alone in the ayre without any thyng to stay them vpon For in the body and bloud of Christ say they these accidentes can not be nor yet in the ayre for the body and bloud of Christ and the ayre be neither of that bignes fashion smell nor colour that they bread and wyne be Nor in the bread and wyne say they these accidentes can not be for the substaÌ„ce of bread and wyne as they affirme be cleane gone And so there remaineth whitnes but nothing is white there remayneth colours but nothing is coloured therwith there remaineth roundnes but no thyng is round and there is bygnes and yet no thyng is bygge there is swetenes without any swete thyng softnes without any soft thyng breakyng without any thyng broken diuision without any thyng deuided and so other qualities quantities witout any thyng to receyue them And this doctrin they teache
as a necessary article of our fayth But it is not the doctrine of Christe but the subtill Inuension of Antechrist fyrst decreed by Innocent the thyrd and after more at large set furth by schole authors whose studye was euer to defende and set abrode to the worlde all suche matters as y e byshop of Rome had once decreed And the deuil by his minister Antichrist had so daseled the eyes of a great multitude of christen people in these latter dayes that they sought not for their fayth at the cleare light of Gods worde but at the Romishe Antichrist beleuyng whatsoeuer he prescribed vnto thē yea though it were against all reason all senses and Gods most holy worde also For els he could not haue been very Antichrist in dede except he had been so repugnaunt vnto Christe whose doctrine is cleane contrary to this doctrine of Antichrist For Christ teacheth that we receiue very bread and wyne in the most blessed supper of the Lord as sacramentes to admonishe vs that as we be fedde with bread wyne bodely so wee be fedde with the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ spiritually As in our baptisme we receiue very water to signifye vnto vs that as water is an element to washe the body outwardly so be our soules washed by the holy ghost inwardly The seconde principall thyng wherein the Papistes varry from the truth of Gods worde is this They say that the very natural fleshe and bloud of Christe whiche suffered for vs vpon the crosse and sitteth at the right hand of the father in heauen is also really substancially corporally and naturally in or vnder the accidentes of the sacramental bread and wyne which they cal the fourmes of bread and wyne And yet here they varry not a lytle among them selues For some say that the very natural body of Christ is there but not naturally nor sensibly And other saye that it is there naturally and sensibly and of the same bygnes fashion that it is in heauen and as the same was borne of the blessed virgyn Mary and that it is there broken and torne in peeces with our teethe And this appeareth partly by the schole authors and partly by the confession of Beringarius whiche Nicholaus the second constrayned him to make whiche was this That of the sacramentes of the Lordes table the sayd Beringarius should promise to holde that fayth whiche the sayd Pope Nicholas and his counsail held whiche was that not onely the sacramentes of bread and wyne but also the very fleshe and bloud of oure Lorde Iesu Christ are sensibly handeled of the priest in the altare broken and torne with the teethe of the faythfull people But the true catholike fayth grounded vpon Gods moste infallible woorde teacheth vs that our sauiour Christ as concernyng his mannes nature and bodely presence is gone vp vnto heauen sitteth at the right hand of his father and there shall he tarry vntyl the worldes ende at what tyme he shal come agayn to iudge both the quicke and the dead as he sayth him selfe in many scriptures I forsake the worlde sayth he and go to my Father And in another place he sayth You shal haue euer poore men among you but me you shall not euer haue And again he sayth Many hereafter shall come and laye Loke here is Christe or looke there he is but beloue them not And sainct Peter sayth in the Actes that heauen must receiue Christe vntyll the tyme that all thynges shall be restored And saint Paule writyng to the Colossians agreeth hereto saiyng Seke for thinges that be aboue where Christ is sittyng at the right hand of the father And sainct Paule speakyng of the very sacrament sayth As often as you shall eate this bread and drynke this cuppe shewe furth the Lordes death vntyll he come Tyll he come sayth S. Paule signifiyng that he is not there corporally present For what speeche were this or who vseth of him that is already present to say Untyl he come For Untyl I come signifyeth that he is not yet present This is the catholike fayth whiche we learne from our youth in our common Crede and whiche Christ taught the Apostles folowed and the martyres confirmed with theyr bloud And although Christ in his humayne nature substantially really corporally naturally and sensibly be present with his father in heauē yet sacramentally and spiritually he is here present in water bread and wyne as in signes and sacramentes but he is in deede spiritually in the faythfull christian people whiche accordyng to Christes ordinaunce be baptised or receyue the holye communion or vnfainedly beleue in him Thus haue you hard the seconde pryncipal article wherin the Papistes vary from the truthe of Goddes worde and from the catholike faith Nowe the thyrde thynge wherin they varye is this The Papistes saye that euell and vngodlye men receaue in this sacramente the very bodye and bloud of Christe and eate and drynke the selfe same thinge that the good and godly men doo But the truthe of Gods woorde is contrary that al those that be godly mēbres of Christe as they corporally eate the bread and drinke the wyne so spiritually they eate and drinke Christes very fleshe and bloude And as for the wycked membres of the dyuell they eate the sacramental bread and drinke the sacramental wyne but they doo not spiritually eate Christs fleshe nor drinke his blode but they eate and drinke theyr owne damnation The fourthe thynge wherein the Popyshe preestes dissente frome the manifest woorde of God is this They saie that they offre Christe euery day for remission of sinne and distribute by their Masses the merites of Christes passion But the prophetes apostels and euangelistes doo saye that Christe him selfe in his owne person made a sacrifice for our sinnes vppon the Crosse by whose woundes all our diseases were healed and our sinnes pardoned and so dyd neuer no preest man nor creature but he nor he dyd the same neuer more than ones And the benefite hereof is in no mannes power to gyue vnto any other but euery man muste receaue it at Christes handes him selfe by his owne faith and beliefe as the prophete saieth HERE ENDETH THE fyrste booke THE SECONDE BOOKE IS AGAINST THE ERROVR OF Transubstantiation THVS HAVE you hearde declared fower thynges wherein chiefly the papisticall doctrine varieth from the true worde of God and frome the olde catholyke Christen faith in this matter of the lordes supper Nowe lest any man shuld thynke that I faine any thinge of myne owne heade without any other ground or authoritee you shall heare by Goddes grace as well the erroures of the Papistes confuted as the catholike truthe defended both by goddes most certaine woorde and also by the moste olde approued authors and martyrs of Christes churche And fyrst that breade and wine remain after the woordes of consecration and bee eaten and drunken in the
said that Christ was a crafty iuggler that made thinges to appere to mens sightes that in dede were no suche thynges but formes onely figures and apparances of them But to conclude in fewe wordes this processe of our senses let al the Papistes lay their heades togither and thei shal neuer be able to shew one article of our faith so directely contrary to our senses that all our senses by dayly experience shall affirme a thynge to be and yet oure fayth shall teache vs the contrary thervnto Nowe for as much as it is declared how this Papisticall opinion of Transubstantiation is against the woorde of God agaynst nature against reason and agaynste all our senses wee shall shewe furthermore that it is agaynst the fayth and doctrine of the old authors of Christes churche begynnyng at those authors whiche were nerest vnto Christes tyme and therefore myght best knowe the truthe herein Fyrst Iustinus a great learned man and an holy martyr the oldest author that this day is knowen to write any treatie vpon the sacramentes and wrote not muche aboue one hundred yeres after Christes ascension He wryteth in his seconde apologie that the bread water and wine in this sacrament ar not to be taken as other cōmon meates and drinkes be but they bee meates ordeyned purposely to geue thankes to god and therfore be called Eucharistia and be called also the body and bloude of Christ. And that it is laufull for none to eate or drynke of them but that professe Christ and lyue accordyng to the same And yet the same meate and drynke saith he is chaunged into our fleshe and bloud and norisheth our bodies By which saiyng it is euident that Iustinus thought that the bread and wine remained still for els it could not haue been tourned into our fleshe and bloud to nourishe our bodies Next hym was Ireneus aboue 150. yeres after Christ who as it is supposed could not be deceiued in the necessary pointes of our faithe for he was a disciple of Polycarpus which was disciple to saint Iohn the Euangelist This Ireneus foloweth the sense of Iustinus wholly in this matter and almoste also his woordes sayenge that the bread wherein we geue thankes vnto God although it be of the yearth yet whan the name of God is called vpon it it is not than common bread but the bread of thankes geuyng hauyng two thyngs in it one earthly and the other heuenly What ment he by the heauenly thyng but the sanctification whyche cometh by the inuocation of the name of God And what by the earthly thynge but the very bread which as he sayd before is of the earth and which also he saith doeth nourishe our bodies as other bread dothe whiche we doo vse Shortely after Ireneus was Origen about 200. yeares after Christes ascension Who also affirmeth that the materiall bread remaineth saiyng that the mattier of the breade auayleth nothyng but goeth doune into the bealy and is auoided dounewarde but the woorde of God spoken vpon the breade is it that auaileth After Origen came Cyprian the holy martyr about the yeare of our Lorde 250. who wryteth against theym that ministred this Sacrament with water onely and without wyne For as muche sayth he as Christ sayd I am a true vyne therefore the bloud of Christ is not water but wyne nor it can not bee thouhgt that his bloud wherby wee bee redemed and haue life is in the cuppe whan wyne is not in the cuppe whereby the bloud of Christ is shewed What woordes could Cyprian haue spoken more plainly to shewe that the wyne doth remayne than to say thus If there bee no wyne there is no bloud of Christ And yet he speaketh shortly after as plainely in the same Epistle Christ sayth he takyng the cuppe blessed it and gaue it to his disciples saiyng Drynke you all of this for this is the bloud of the newe testament whiche shall bee shedde for many for the remission of synnes I say vnto you that from hencefurth I wyll not drynke of this creature of the vyne vntyll I shall drinke with you newe wyne in the kyngdome of my father By these woordes of Christe sayth sainct Cyprian we perceiue that the cuppe whiche the Lorde offered was not onely water but also wyne And that it was wyne that Christ called his bloud whereby it is cleare that Christes bloud is not offered if there be no wyne in the Chalise And after it foloweth Howe shal we drynke with Christ newe wyne of the creature of the vyne if in the sacrifice of God the father and of Christ we do not offre wyne In these wordes of sainct Cyprian appereth moste manyfestly that in this sacrament is not only offered very wyne that is made of grapes that come of the vyne but also that we drynke the same And yet the same geueth vs to vnderstand that if we drynke that wyne worthely we drynke also spiritually the very bloud of Christ whiche was shed for our synnes Eusebius Emissenus a mā of syngular fame in learnyng about CCC yeres after Christes ascention did in fewe wordes set out this matter so plainely bothe howe the bread and wyne be conuerted into the body bloud of Christ and yet remayne styll in their nature and also howe besydes the outwarde receiuyng of bread and wyne Christ is inwardely by fayth receyued in our heartes al this I say he doth so plainly set out that more playnnesse can not be reasonably desyred in this matter For he sayth that the cōuersion of the visible creatures of bread wyne into the body and bloud of Christ is lyke vnto our cōuersion in baptisme where outwardly nothyng is changed but remayneth the same that was before but all the alteration is inwardely and spiritually If thou wylt knowe sayth he howe it ought not to seme to the a newe thyng and impossible that yearthly and corruptible thynges be turned into the substance of Christ loke vpon thy selfe which art made newe in baptisme whan thou wast farre from life and banished as a straunger frō mercy and fro the way of saluation and inwardely wast dead yet sodeynly thou beganste another lyfe in Christ and wast made newe by holsome mysteris and wast turned into the body of the churche not by seyng but by beleuynge and of the childe of damnation by a secrete purenesse thou waste made the chosen sonne of God Thou visibly dyddest remayne in the same measure that thou haddest before but inuisibly thou wast made greater without any increase of thy body Thou wast the self same person and yet by increace of faythe thou wast made an other man Outwardely nothynge was added but all the chaunge was inwardly And so was man made the son of Christ and Christe fourmed in the mynd of man Therfore as thou puttyng away thy former vilenesse diddest receaue a newe dygnitee not feelyng any change in thy body and as the curynge of thy
both perfect God and perfect mā And for a playne declaracion hereof the olde auncient authors geue two examples one is of man whiche is made of two partes of a soule and of a body and eche of these two partes remayne in man at one tyme. So that whan the soule by the almyghty power of God is put in to the body neither the body nor soule perisheth thereby but therof is made a perfect man hauyng a perfect soule and a perfect body remaynyng in hym bothe at one tyme. The other example whiche the olde authors brynge in for this purpose is of the holy supper of our Lord whiche consisteth say they of two partes of the sacrament or visible element of bread wyne and of the body and bloud of Christ. And as in them that duely receiue the sacrament the very natures of bread and wyne cease not to be there but remayne there styll and be eaten corporally as the body and bloud of Christ be eaten spiritually so likewyse doth the diuine nature of Christ remayne styl with his humanitee Let nowe the Papistes auaunt them selues of their Transubstantiation that there remayneth no bread nor wyne in the ministration of the sacrament if they wyll defende the wicked heresies before rehersed that Christ is not God and man both together But to proue that this was the mynde of the olde authors besyde the saiyng of sainct Augustyne here recited I shall also reherse diuers other Sainct Ihon Chrysostome wryteth against the pestilent errour of Apollinaris whiche affirmed that the Godhead and manhead in Christ were so myxed and confounded together that they bothe made but one nature Against whō sainct Ihon Chrysostome writeth thus Whan thou speakest of God thou must consyder a thyng that in nature is syngle without composition without conuersion that is inuisible immortall incircumscriptible incomprehensible with suche lyke And whan thou speakest of manne thou meanest a nature that is weake subiecte to hunger thyrste wepyng feare sweatyng and suche lyke passions whiche can not bee in the diuine nature And whan thou speakest of Christ thou ioynest two natures together in one person who is bothe passible and impassible Passible as concernyng his fleshe and impassible in his deitee And after he concludeth saiyng Wherfore Christe is bothe God and man God by his impassible nature and man because he suffred He himeslfe beyng one person one sonne one Lord hath the dominion and power of two natures ioyned together whiche be not of one substance but eche of theim hath his properties distincte from the other And therefore remayneth there two natures distincte and not confounded For as before the consecration of the bread we call it bread but whan Goddes grace hath sanctified it by the priest it is deliuered from the name of bread and is exalted to the name of the body of the Lorde although the nature of the bread remayne stil in it and it is not called two bodyes but one body of Gods sonne so likewyse here the diuine nature resteth in the body of Christ and these two make one sonne and one person These wordes of sainct Chrysostome declare and that not in obscure termes but in playne wordes that after the consecracion the nature of bread remayneth styll although it haue an hygher name and bee called the body of Christ to signifie vnto the godly eaters of that bread that they spiritually eat the supernatural bread of the body of Christe who spiritually is there present and dwelleth in them and they in him although corporally he sytteth in heauen at the right hand of his father Herevnto accordeth also Gelasius writyng gainst Eutyches and Nestorius of whome the one said that Christ was a perfect man but not God and the other affirmed clean contrary that hee was very God but not man But againste these two heinous heresies Gelasius proueth bi moste manifest scriptures that Christe is both god and man and that after his incarnacion remained in hym the nature of his godheade so that hee hathe in hym twoo natures with their naturall properties and yet is hee but one Christe And for the more euident declaratiō hereof he bringeth two examples ▪ the one is of man who beeynge but one yet he is made of two partes and hath in him two natures remaininge both togyther in him that is to saye the bodye and the soule with their naturall properties The other example is of the sacrament of the body bloud of Christ which saith he is a godly thing ▪ and yet the substaunce or nature of breade and wine do not cease to be there styll Note well these wordes againste all the Papistes of our time that Gelasius which was byshop of Rome more thā a thousād years passed writeth of this sacrament that the breade and wyne cease not to be there styll as Christ ceased not to be god after his incarnation but remayned styll perfect god as he was before Theodoretus also affirmeth the same both in his first and in his seconde dialoge In the fyrst he saith thus He that called his naturall body wheate and breade and also called him selfe a vyne the selfe same called bread and wyne his bodye and bloudde and yet chaunged not their natures And in his secōd dialogue he saith more plainly For saith he as the breade and wine after the consecration lose not their propre nature but kepe their former substance forme and figure whiche they had before euen so the body of Christ after his ascention was chaunged into the godlye substaunce Nowe lette the Papistes choose whyche of these two they wyll graunte for one of theim they muste needes graunte either that the nature and substaunce of breadde and wine remayne styll in the sacrament after the consecration and then must thei recant their doctrine of Transubstantiation or els that they bee of the errour of Nestorius and other which didde say that the nature of the Godhead remained not in Christ after his incarnation For all these old authors agree that it is in the one as it is in the other Nowe forasmuche as it is proued sufficientelye as well by the holye Scripture as by naturall operacion by naturall reason by all our senses and by the most old and beste learned authors and holy matyres of CHRISTES churche that the substaunce of breadde and wyne dooe remayne and be receaued of faithefull people in the blessed sacramente or supper the LORD It is a thinge woorthy to be considered and well waied what moued the schoole authors of late yeares to defende the contrarye opinion not onely so farre frome all experience of oure senses and so farre frome all reasone but also cleane contrarye to the olde Churche of CHRIST and to goddes moste holy worde Surelye nothing moued them thereto so much as did the vaine faithe whiche they hadde in the churche and sea of Rome For Iohannes Scotus otherwyse called Dunce the subtylest of al the schole authors in
in bread and wyne declaryng that as the bread and wyne corporally comforte and feede our bodyes so doth he with his fleshe and bloud spiritually comfort and feede our soules And nowe may be easyly answered the Papistes argument whereof they do so muche boast For bragge they neuer so muche of the conuersion of bread and wyne into the body and bloud of Christ yet that conuersion is spirituall and putteth not awaye the corporall presence of the material bread and wyne But for asmuche as the same is a moste holy sacrament of our spiritual norishement whiche we haue by the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ there must nedes remayne the sensible element that is to say bread and wyne without the whiche there can be no sacrament As in our spiritual regeneration there can be no sacrament of baptisme if there be no water For as Baptisme is no perfect sacrament of spiritual regeneration without there be aswell the element of water as the holy ghoste spiritually regenerating the person that is baptised which is signified by the saide water euen so the souper of our Lorde can bee no perfecte sacramente of spirituall foode except there be as well bread and wine as the body and bloode of our sauiour Christ spiritually feeding vs which by the said breade and wine is signified And howe so euer the body and bloode of our sauiour Christ be ther presēt thei may as wel be present ther with the substance of bread wyne as with the accidentes of the same as the schole authors do confesse them selues and it shall bee well proued yf the aduersaryes will denye it Thus you se the strongest argumente of the Papistes answered vnto and the chiefe foundacion whervpon they buylde their errour of transubstantiation vtterlye subuerted and ouerthrowen An other reason haue they of lyke strengthe If the breade shoulde remaine saye they than shulde folowe many absurdities and chiefely that Christe hath taken the nature of breade as he tooke the nature of manne and so ioyned it to his substance And than as we haue God verely incarnate for our redemption so shoulde wee haue him Impanate Thou mayste consydre good reader that the reste of theyr reasons be very weake and feeble whan these bee the chiefe and strongest Truth it is in deede that Christe shoulde haue beene impanate yf hee hadde ioyned the breade vnto his substaunce in vnitee of persone that is to saye yf hee hadde ioyned the breade vnto hym in suche sorte that he had made the breade one persone with him selfe But for as much as he is ioyned to the bread but sacramentally ther foloweth no Impanation thereof no more than the holy ghost is Inaquate that is to say made water being sacramentally ioyned to the water in baptisme Nor he was not made a doue whan he toke vppon him the forme of a doue to signifie that he whome saint Iohn did baptise was verye CHRIST But rather of the erroure of the Papistes theym selues as one erroure draweth an other after it shoulde folowe the greate absurditie whiche they speake vppon that is to saye that Christe shoulde bee Impanate and Inuinate For yf Christe doo vse the breade in suche wise that he doeth not adnihilate and make nothing of it as the Papistes say but maketh of it hys owne bodye than is the bread ioyned to his body in a greater vnitee than is his humanitee to his Godhead For his Godhead is adioyned vnto his humanitee in vnitye of person and not of nature But our sauiour Christ by their sayinge adioyneth breade vnto his body in vnitee bothe of nature and person So that the breade and the body of Christe be but one thinge bothe in nature and person And so is there a more entier vnion betwene Christe and breade than betweene hys godheade and manhead or betwene his sowle and his bodye And thus these argumentes of the Papistes retourne lyke riueted nayles vppon their owne heades Yet a thyrde reason they haue whyche they gather out of the syxte of Iohn where CHRIST sayeth I am lyuely breade which came from heauen If anye manne eate of thys breade he shall lyue for euer And the breadde whiche I wyll giue is my fleshe whiche I wyll gyue for the lyfe of the worlde Than reason they after this fashion If the breade whyche Chryste gaue bee his fleshe that it canne not also bee materiall breade and so it muste needes folowe that the materiall breade is gone and that none other substaunce remaineth but the fleshe of CHRIST onlye To this is soone made answere that Christ in that place of Iohn spake not of the materiall and sacramentall breade nor of the sacrementall eating for that was spoken two or thre yeares before the sacramente was fyrste ordained but hee spake of spirituall breade manny tymes repetynge I am the bread of lyfe which came frome heauen and of spirituall eating by faith after whiche sorte hee was at the same presente tyme eaten of as manye as beleued on him although the sacramēt was not at that tyme made and instituted And therefore he saide Your fathers did eate Manna in the deserte and died but he that eateth this bread shall lyue for euer Therefore this place of S. Iohn canne in no wyse be vnderstand of the sacramentall breade which neyther came frō heauen neither giueth life to al that eat it Nor of such bread CHRIST coulde haue than presentlye saide This is my fleshe excepte they wyll saye that Christe dydde than consecrate so many yeares before the instititution of his holy supper Nowe that I haue made a full direct plain answere to the vaine reasons and cauillacions of the Papistes ordre requireth to make lykewise answere vnto their sophisticall allegacions and wresting of authors vnto their phantastycall purposes There bee chiefelye thre places which at the fyrste shewe seeme muche to make for their intent but when they shalbe throughly wayed thei make nothing for theim at all The fyrst is a place of Cyprian in his sermon of the Lordes supper where he saith as is alleged in the Detection of the diuels sophistrye This breade which our lorde gaue to his disciples chaunged in nature but not in outward forme is by the omnipotencye of goddes woorde made fleshe Here the Papistes sticke toothe and nayle to these woordes Chaunged in nature Ergo say they the nature of the bread is chaunged Here is one chiefe point of the diuels sophistry vsed whoe in allegacion of scripture vseth euer either to adde thereto or to take away from it or to alter the sense therof And so haue they in this author lefte out those woordes whiche would open plainly all the whole matter For next the wordes which be here before of them recited do folowe these wordes As in the person of Christ the humanitee was seen and the diuinitee was hyd euen so dyd the diuinitee ineffably putte it selfe
into the visible sacrament Whiche wordes of Cyprian do manyfestly shewe that the sacrament doth styll remayne with the diuinitee and that sacramentally the diuinitee is poured into the bread and wyne the same bread wyne styll remainyng like as thesame diuinitee by vnitee of person was in the humanitee of Christ the same humanitee stil remainyng with y ◠diuinite And yet the bread is chaunged not in shape nor substance but in nature as Cyprian truely sayth not meanyng that the naturall substance of bread is cleane gone but that by Gods word there is added therto another higher propertie nature and condition farre passyng the nature and condicion of common bread that is to saye that the bread doth shewe vnto vs as the same Cyprian sayth that wee bee partakers of the spirite of God and moste purely ioyned vnto Christ and spiritually feade with his fleshe and bloud so that nowe the sayd misticall bread is both a corporall foode for the body and a spiritual foode for the soule And likewise is the nature of the water chaūged in baptisme forasmuche as besyde his common nature whiche is to washe make cleane the body it declareth vnto vs that our soules he also washed made cleane by the holy ghost And thus is answered the chiefe authoritee of the doctours whiche the Papistes take for the principal defence of their error But for further declaracion of sainct Cyprians mynde herein reade the place of him before recited fol. 24. Another authoritee they haue of sainct Ihon Chrysostome whiche thei boast also to be inuincible Chrysostome say they writeth thus in a certaine homely De Eucharistia Doest thou see bread Doest thou see wyne Do they auoyde beneth as other meates do God forbyd thynke not so For as waxe if it be put into the fyre it is made lyke the fyer no substance remayneth nothyng is lefte so here also thynke thou that the mysteries be consumed by the substance of the body At these wordes of Chrysostome the Papistes do triumph as though they had won the fielde Lo say they doeth not Chrysostomus the great clarke say most plainly that we se neither bread nor wyne but that as waxe in the fyer they be consumed to nothyng so that no substance remayneth But if they had rehersed no more but the very next sentence that foloweth in Chrysostome which craftily and maliciously thei leaue out the meanyng of sainct Iohn Chrysostome would easily haue appeared and yet wyll make them blushe if they bee not vtterly past shame For after the foresayd woordes of Chrysostome immediatly folowe these wordes Wherfore sayth he whan ye comme to these mysteries do not thynke that you receiue by a man the body of God but that with tongues you receiue fyer by the Angels Seraphyn And straight after it foloweth thus Thynke that the bloud of saluacion floweth out of the pure and godly syde of Christ and so cōmyng to it receiue it with pure lippes Wherfore brother I pray you beseche you let vs not be from the churche nor let vs not be occupyed there with vaine cōmunication but let vs stand fearefull tremblyng castyng doune our eyes liftyng vp our myndes mournyng priuely with out speache and reioysyng in our heartes These wordes of Chrysostome do folowe immediatly after the other woordes whiche the Papistes before rehersed Therfore if the Papistes wil gather of the wordes by them recited that there is neither bread nor wyne in the sacrament I may aswell gather of the woordes that folowe that there is neither priest nor Christes body For as in the former sentence Chrysostome sayth that we may not thinke that we see bread wyne so in the second sentēce he sayth that we may not thynke that wee receyue the body of Christ of the priestes handes Wherfore if vpon the second sentence as the Papistes them selues wyll say it can not be truely gathered that in the holy Communion there is not the body of Christ ministered by the priest then must they confesse also that it can not bee well and truely gathered vpon the fyrst sentence that there is no bread nor wyne But there be al these thynges together in the holy Communion Christe himselfe spiritually eaten and drunken and norishyng the right beleuers the bread wyne as a sacrament declaryng the same and the priest as a minister therof Wherfore S. Ihon Chrysostome ment not absolutely to denye that there is bread wyne or to denye vtterly the priest and the body of Christ to be there but he vseth a speache whiche is no pure Negatiue but a Negatiue by comparison Whiche fashion of speeche is cōmonly vsed not onely in the scripture and among all good authors but also in all maner of languages For when two thynges bee compared together in the extollyng of the more excellēt or abasyng of the more vyle is many tymes vsed a Negatiue by comparishon whiche neuerthelesse is no pure Negatiue but onely in the respecte of the more excellent or the more base As by example When the people reiectyng the prophete Samuel desyred to haue a kyng almightie God sayd to Samuel They haue not reiected thee but me Not meanyng by this negatiue absolutely that they had not reiected Samuel in whose place they desired to haue a kyng but by that one negatiue by comparison he vnderstode two affirmatiues that is to saye that they had reiected Samuell and not hym alone but also y t they had chiefely reiected God And whan the prophet Dauid said in the person of Christe I am a worme and not a man by this negatiue he denyed not vtterlye that Christe was a man but the more vehementlye to expresse the great humyliation of Christe he said that he was not abased onely to the nature of man but was broughte so lowe that he might rather be called a worme than a man This maner of speeche was familiar and vsuall to S. Paule as whan he sayde It is not I that doe it but it is the synne that dwelleth in me And in an other place he saithe Christe sent me not to baptise but to preache the gospel And agayn he saith My speche and preachyng was not in wordes of mans persuasion but in manyfest declaration of the spirite and power And he saith also Neyther he that grafteth nor he that watereth is any thynge but God that gyueth the increase And he saieth moreouer It is not I that lyue but Christ lyueth within me And God forbydde that I shoulde reioyce in any thyng but in the Crosse of our Lord Iesu Christe And further We doo not wrastle againste fleshe and bloudde but agaynst the spirites of darkenesse In all these sentences and many other lyke although they bee negatiues neuerthelesse S. Paule mente not clerely to denye that he dyd that euyl wherof he spake or vtterly to say that he was not sent to baptise who in dede did baptise at
certayn tymes and was sent to do al thinges that pertained to saluation or that in his office of settynge foorthe Goddes word he vsed no witty persuasions whiche in deede he vsed moste discreetely or that the grafter and waterer bee nothyng whych be Goddes creatures made to his similitude without whose worke there shuld be no increase or to say that he was not alyue who both lyued and ranne from cuntrey to countrey to set foorth Goddes glory or clerely to affirme that he gloried and reioyced in no other thyng thā in Christes crosse who reioyced with all men that were in ioye and sorowed with all that were in sorowe or to deny vtterly that we wrastle agaynst fleshe and bloud whych ceasse not dayly to wrastle and warre agaynst our enemies the worlde the fleshe and the dyuel In all these sentences S. Paule as I sayde ment not clerely to deny these thyngs which vndoubtedly were all trewe but he ment that in comparison of other greatter thynges these smaller were not muche to be estemed but that the greater thynges were the chief thyngs to be consydered As that syn committed by his infirmitie was rather to be imputed to original syn or corruption of nature which lay lurkyng within hym than to his owne will and consent And that although he was sente to baptyse yet he was chiefely sent to preache Goddes worde And that althoughe he vsed wyse and discreete persuasions therin yet the successe therof came principally of the power of God and of the workyng of the holy spirite And that althoughe the grafter and waterer of the gardeyn be some thynges and doo not a lyttell in theyr offyces yet it is God chiefely that geueth the increace And that although he lyued in this worlde yet his chiefe lyfe concernyng God was by Christ whome he had lyuyng within hym And that although he gloried in many other thynges ye in his owne infirmitees yet his greattest ioy was in the redemption by the crosse of Christe And that althoughe oure spiryte dayly fyghteth agaynste our fleshe yet our chiefe and principall fyght is agaynst our gostely enemies the subtill and puisant wicked spirites and diuels The same maner of speeche vsed also S. Peter in his fyrste epistle saiyng That the apparayle of women shoulde not be outwardly with broyded heare and settynge on of golde nor in puttynge on of gorgious apparayle but that the inwarde man of the harte shoulde be with out corruption In whyche maner of speche he intended not vtterly to forbid al browderyng of hear al gold and costly apparell to al women For euery one muste bee apparailed accordyng to their condition state and degree but he ment hereby clerely to condempne all pryde and excesse in apparayle and to moue all women that they should study to deck their soules inwardly with al vertues not to be curious outwardly to deck and adorne their bodies with sumptuous apparell And our sauiour Christe hymselfe was full of suche maner of speeches Gather not vnto you saieth he treasure vpon earthe wyllynge vs therby rather to set our myndes vpon heauenly treasure whyche euer endureth than vpon earthly treasure whiche by many sundry occasions perysheth and is taken awaye frome vs. And yet wordly treasure muste nedes bee had and possessed of some men as the person tyme and occasion dooth serue Likewyse he said Whan you be brought before kynges and princes thynke not what and howe you shal answer Not willyng vs by this negatiue that we shuld negligently and vnaduisedly answere we care not what but that wee shoulde depende of our heauenly father trustynge that by his holy spirite he wyll sufficientely instructe vs of answere rather than to truste of any aunswere to bee deuised by oure owne wytte and study And in the same manner he spake whan he sayde It is not you that speake but it is the spirite of God that speaketh within you For the spirite of god is he that principally putteth godly wordes into our mouthes and yet neuer the lesse we do speake accordyng to his mouyng And to be short in al these sentences folowing that is to saie Call no man your father vpon erth Let no man cal you lord or master Fear not them that kyll the body I came not to send peace vpon earth It is not in me to set you at my right hand or left hande You shal not worshyp the father neither in this mount nor in Ierusalem I take no witnes at no man My doctrine is not myne I seke not my glory In all these negatiues oure sauiour Christe spake not precisely vtterly to deny al y e forsayd things but in cōparison of them to prefer other thinges as to preferre our father and lord in heuen aboue any worldly father lord or master in earth and his feare aboue the feare of any creature and his word and gospell aboue al worldly peace Also to preferre spirituall and inward honoryng of God in pure hart mynd aboue locall corporal outward honor and that Christe preferred his fathers glorye aboue his owne Now forasmuch as I haue declared at length the nature and kynd of these negatiue speches whyche bee no pure negatiues but by comparison it is easy hereby to make answere to S. Iohn Chrysostome who vsed this phrase of speche moste of any author For his meanynge in his foresayde homily was not that in the celebration of the Lords supper is neyther bread nor wyne neither priest nor the body of Christe which the Papistes themselues must nedes cōfesse but his entēt was to draw our myndes vpwardes to heauen that we shuld not consider so muche the bread wine priest and body of Christ we shuld consyder his diuinitee and holy spirite gyuen vnto vs to our eternall saluation And therfore in the same place he vseth so many tymes these words Thinke and thinke not willyng vs by those wordes that we shulde not fixe our thoughtes myndes vpon the bread wine priest nor Christes body but to lyft vp our hartes higher vnto his spirite and diuinite without the whiche his body auaileth nothynge as he saith hym selfe It is the spirite that gyueth lyfe the fleshe auayleth nothyng And as the same Chrysostom in many places moueth vs not to cōsider the water in baptisme but rather to haue respect to the holy ghost receued in baptisme and represented by the water euen so doth he in this homily of the holy cōmuniō moue vs to lift vp our mynds frō al visible corporal things to thīgs inuisible spiritual In so muche that although Christe was but ones crucified yet would Chrysostome haue vs to thynke that we see hym dayly whypped and scourged before our eies and his body hāgyng vpon the Crosse and the speare thruste into his side and the most holy bloud to flowe out of his syde into our mouthes After whiche maner S. Paule wrote to the
Galathiās that Christ was painted and crucified before their eies Therfore saith Chrysostom in the same homily a litle before the place rehersed What dost thou O man dyddest not thou promise to the prieste whiche sayd Lift vp your myndes and hartes and thou dyddest answere We lift them vp vnto the Lord Art not thou ashamed and afrayde beyng at that same houre found a lyar A wonderfull thyng The table is set furth furnished with Goddes mysteries the Lambe of God is offered for thee the priest is careful for thee spiritual fyer cōmeth out of that heauenly table the Angels Seraphyn be there presēt coueryng their faces with vi wynges All the Angelical powers with the priest be meanes intercessors for thee a spirituall fyer commeth doune from heauen bloud in the cuppe is drunke out of the most pure syde vnto thy purification And arte not thou ashamed afrayde and abashed not endeuorynge thy selfe to purchase Goddes mercy O man doth not thine owne conscience condemne thee There be in the weke 168. houres and God asketh but one of them to bee geuen wholly vnto him and thou consumest that in worldly busynesse in triflyng and talkyng with what boldnesse than shalte thou come to these holy mysteries O corrupt conscience Hytherto I haue rehersed sainct Ihon Chrysostomes woordes whiche do shewe howe our mindes should be occupied at this holy table of our Lorde that is to say withdrawen from the consideracion of sensible thynges vnto the contemplacion of moste heauenly and godly thynges And thus is answered this place of Chrysostom which the Papists toke for an insoluble and a place that no man was able to answere But for a further declaracion of Chrysostomes mynde in this matter reade the place of him before rehersed fol. 26. and 28. Yet there is another place of sainct Ambrose whiche the Papistes thynke maketh muche for their purpose but after due examinacion it shal plainly appeare howe muche they be deceyued They allege these wordes of sainct Ambrose in a booke intituled De ijs qui initiantur mysterijs Let vs proue that there is not that thyng whiche natur formed but whiche benediction did cōsecrate and that benediction is of more strength than nature For by the blessyng nature it selfe is also chaunged Moyses helde a rodde he cast it from him and it was made a serpent Againe he tooke the serpent by the tayle and it was turned againe into the nature of a rodde Wherfore thou seest that by the grace of the prophet the nature of the serpent and rodde was twyse chaunged The fluddes of Egypt ranne pure water sodenly bloud beganne to brast out of the vaynes of the sprynges so that men could not drynke of the fludde but at the prayer of the prophet the bloud of the fludde went away and the nature of water came againe The people of the Hebrues were compassed aboute on the one syde with the Egyptians and on the other syde with the sea Moyses lyfted vp his rodde the water deuided it selfe stoode vp like a walle and betwene the waters was left a waye for them to passe on foote And Iordane against nature turned backe to the head of his sprynge Dothe it not appere now that the nature of the sea fludds or of the course of freshe water was changed The people was dry Moyses touched a stone and water came out of the stone Dyd not grace here woorke aboue nature to make the stone to bryng forthe water whyche it had not of nature Marath was a most bytter floud so that the people beyng drye could not drinke therof Moyses put woode into the water and the nature of the water lost his bytternes whiche grace infused did sodeynly moderate In the tyme of Heliseus the prophete ▪ an axe head fell from one of the prophetes seruauntes into the water he that loste the yron desyred the prophet Heliseus help who put the helue into the water and the yron swam aboue Which thyng we know was done aboue nature for yron is heuier than the liquor of water Thus wee perceaue that grace is of more force thā nature and yet hitherto we haue rehersed but the grace of the blessing of the prophets Nowe yf the blessynge of a man be of suche valewe that it may chaunge nature what dooe wee saye of the consecration of God wherein is the operation of the woordes of our sauiour Christe For this sacrament whiche thou receauest is doon by the woord of Christe Than if the worde of Helias was of suche power that it coulde brynge fyer downe frome heauen shall not the woorde of Christe be of that power to chaunge the kyndes of the elementes Of the makynge of the whole worlde thou haste redde that God spake and the thynges were doone He commaunded and they were created The worde than of Christe that coulde of no thynges make thynges that were not can it not change those thynges that be into that thynge whiche before they were not For it is no lesse mattier to geue to thynges newe natures than to alter natures Thus farre haue I rehersed the woordes of Saynt Ambrose yf the sayd boke bee his whiche they that bee of greatest learnyng and iudgement doo not thynke by which woordes the Papistes would proue that in the supper of the Lorde after the woordes of Consecration as they bee commonly called there remaineth neither bread nor wyne bycause that S. Ambrose saieth in this place that the nature of the bread and wyne is chaunged But to satisfie their myndes let vs grant for their pleasure that the forsaid boke was Saint Ambrose owne worke yet the same boke maketh nothynge for their purpose but quite agaynste them For he saieth not that the substaunce of bread and wyne is gone but he sayth that theyr nature is chaunged that is to saye that in the holy communion we oughte not to receaue the bread and wyne as other common meates and drynkes but as thynges cleane chaunged into a hygher estate nature and condition to be taken as holy meates and drynkes wherby we receaue spirituall feedyng and supernaturall norishement from heauen of the very true body and bloud of our sauior Christ through the omnipotent power of God and the wonderfull workyng of the holy ghost Whiche so well agreeth with the substance of bread and wyne styl remainynge that if they were gone awaye and not there this our spirituall feedyng coulde not be taught vnto vs by theim And therfore in the most part of the exāples whiche S. Ambrose allegeth for the wonderful alteration of natures the substaunces dyd styll remayne after the nature and proprieties were chaunged As whan the water of Iordane contrary to his nature stoode styll lyke a wall or flowed against the streame towardes the head spryng yet the substaunce of the water remayned the same that it was before Lykewyse the stone that aboue his nature and kynde flowed water was
the selfe same stone that it was before And the fludde of Marath that chaunged his nature of bytternesse chaunged for all that no part of his substance No more did that yron whiche contrary to his nature swam vpon the water lose thereby any parte of the substaunce thereof Therfore as in these alteracions of natures the substaunces neuerthelesse remayned the same that they were before the alteracions euen so doeth the substaunce of bread and wyne remayne in the Lordes supper and be naturally receiued and digested into the body not withstandyng the sacramental mutacion of the same into the body and bloud of Christ. Which sacramentall mutation declareth the supernaturall spirituall and inexplicable eatynge and drynkynge feedyng and digestyng of the same body and bloudde of Christe in all theim that godly and accordyng to theyr duetie do receiue the sayd sacramentall bread and wyne And that Saynt Ambrose thus ment that the substance of breade and wyne remayne styll after the consecration it is moste clere by three other examples of the same mater folowynge in the same chapiter One is of theym that bee regenerated in whome after theyr regeneration dooeth styll remayne theyr former naturall substaunce An other is of the Incarnation of our Sauiour Christe in the whyche peryshed no substaunce but remayned as well the substaunce of his godhead as the substance whiche he tooke of the blessed vyrgin Mary The third exaumple is of the water in baptisme where the water styll remayneth water although the holy ghost come vpon the water or rather vpon him that is baptised therein And although the same sainct Ambrose in an other booke entitled De sacramentis doeth saye that the bread is bread before the wordes of consecration but when the consecration is doone of bread is made the body of Christe Yet in the same booke in the same chapiter he telleth in what maner and forme the same is done by the woordes of Christ not by takyng away the substance of the bread but addyng to the bread the grace of Christs body so calling it the body of Christ And hereof he bryngeth .iiii. examples The first of the regeneration of a man the second is of the standyng of the water of the red sea the third is of the bytter water of Marath and the fourthe is of the yron that swamme aboue the water In euery of the whyche exaumples the former substance remayned stylle not withstandyng alteration of the natures And he concludeth the whole matter in these fewe woordes If there be so muche strength in the woordes of the Lorde Iesu that thynges had theyr begynnynge whiche neuer were before howe muche more be they able to worke that those thynges that were before should remayn also be changed into other thynges Which wordes do shâ—w manyfestly that not withstandyng this wonderfull sacramental and spiritual changyng of the bread into the body of Christ yet the substaÌ„ce of the bread remayneth y e same that it was before Thus is a sufficient answere made vnto thre principall authoritees whiche the Papistes vse to allege to stablysh their errour of transubstaÌ„tiation The first of Cyprian the second of S. Iohn Chrysost. and the thirde of S. Ambrose Other authoritees and reasons som of them do brynge for the same purpose but forasmuche as they be of small moment and weight and easy to be answered vnto I wil passe them ouer at this tyme and not trouble the reader with them but leaue them to be wayed by his discretion And nowe I will reherse dyuers difficultees absurditees and inconueniences whiche muste nedes folow vpon thiâ— error of transubstantiation wherof not one â—oth folow of the true and right faith which is accordyng to Gods worde FYRST if the Papistes be demanded what thyng it is that is broken what is eaten what is dronken and what is chawed with the teeth lyppes and mouth in this sacrament they haue nothyng to answere but the accidences For as they say bread and wyne bee not the visible element in this sacrament but onely their accidentes And so they be forced to saye that accidentes be broken eaten dronken chawen and swalowed without any substance at all whyche is not onely agaynst all reason but also agaynste the doctrine of all auncient authors Secondly these Transubstantiatours do say contrary to al learnyng that the accidentes of bread and wine do hang alone in the ayre without any substance wherin they may bee staied And what can be sayd more foolyshely Thirdly that the substance of Christes body is there really corporally and naturally present without any accidentes of the same And so the Papistes make accidentes to be without substaÌ„ces and substances to bee without accidentes Fourthely they say that the place where the bread and wyne bee hath no substaunce there to fyll that place and so must they nedes graunte vacuum whiche nature vtterly abhorreth Fiftly thei ar not ashamed to say that substaÌ„ce is made of accideÌ„tes wheÌ„ the breade mouleth or is turned into worms or whaÌ„ the wyne sowreth Sixtly that substaÌ„ce is norished without substaÌ„ce by accidentes onely if it chance any catte mouse dogge or any other thyng to eate the sacramentall bread or drink the sacramental wine These inconueniences and absurditees do folowe of the fond Papistical transubstantintion with a numbre of other errors as euyll or worse than these whervnto they bee neuer able to answere as many of them haue coÌ„fessed themselfs And it is a wonder to see how in many of the forsaid thynges they vary among them selues Where as the other doctrine of the scripture and of the old catholike churche but not of the lately corrupted Romyshe church is playn and easy as well to be vnderstanded as to answere to all the foresayd questions without any absurditee or inconuenience folowyng therof so that euery answere shall agree with Goddes worde with the olde Churche and also with all reason and true Philosophie For as touchyng the fyrst poynt what is broken what is eaten what dronken and what chawed in this sacrament it is easy to answere The bread and wyne as S. Paule saith The bread whiche we breake And as coÌ„cernyng the second third pointes neither is the substance of bread wine without their proper accidentes nor their accidentes hang alone in the ayre without any substaunce but accordyng to all learnyng the substance of the bread and wyne reserue their owne accidentes and the accidentes do rest in their owne substances And also as concernyng the fourth poynt there is no place lefte voyde after Consecracion as the Papistes dreame but bread and wyne fulfyll their places as they did before And as touchyng the fift point whereof the wormes or moulyng is engendred and whereof the vyneger commeth the answere is easye to make accordyng to all learnyng and experieÌ„ce that they come accordyng to the course of nature of the substaunce of the bread and wyne to long kept and not of the accideÌ„tes alone
say that they dyd eate his body drunke his bloud although he was not yet borne nor incarnated They say that the body of Christ is euery day many tymes made as often as there be Masses sayd that than and there he is made of bread and wyne We say that Christes body was neuer but ones made and than not of the nature and substance of bread and wyne but of the substance of his blessed mother Thei say that the Masse is a sacrifice satisfactory for sinne by the deuocion of the priest that offereth not by the thyng that is offered But we say that their saiyng is a most haynous lye detestable error against the glory of Christ. For the satisfactiō for our synnes is not the deuociō nor offeryng of the priest but the only hoost and satisfaction for all the sinnes of the world is the death of Christ the oblacion of his body vpon the crosse that is to say the oblacion that Christ him selfe offered ones vpon the crosse and neuer but ones nor neuer none but he And therfore that oblation whiche the priestes make dayly in their papistical Masses can not be a satisfactiō for other mens synnes by the priestes deuocion but it is a mere elusion and subtyll craft of the deuil wherby Antichrist hath many yeres blynded and deceiued the worlde They say that Christe is corporally in many places at one tyme affirmyng that his body is corporally and really present in as many places as there be hoostes consecrated We say that as the sonne corporally is euer in heauen and no where els and yet by his operation and vertue the Sonne is here in yearth by whose influence and vertue all thynges in the worlde be corporally regenerated encreased and growe to their perfecte state so lykewise oure sauiour Christe bodely and corporally is in heauen sittyng at the right hande of his father although spiritually he hath promised to be present with vs vpō yearth vnto the worldes ende And whansoeuer two or thre be gathered together in his name he is there in the myddes among them by whose supernal grace all godly menne bee first by him spiritually regenerated and after encreace and growe to their spiritual perfection in God spiritually by fayth eatyng his fleshe and drinkyng his bloud although the same corporally bee in heauen farre distant from our sight Nowe to returne to the principal matter lest it might bee thought a newe deuise of vs that Christe as concernyng his body his humayne nature is in heauen and not in yearth therfore by Gods grace it shal be euidently proued ▪ that this is no newe deuised matter but that it was euer the olde fayth of the catholike churche vntyll the Papistes inuented a newe fayth that Christ really corporally naturally and sensibly is here styll with vs in yearth shut vp in a boxe or within the compasse of bread and wyne This nedeth no better nor strōger profe than that whiche the old authors bryng for the same that is to say the generall profession of all christian people in the common Crede wherein as concernyng Christes humanitee thei be taught to beleue after this sorte That he was conceiued by the holy ghost borne of the virgyn Mary that he suffered vnder Pontius Pilate was crucified dead and buryed that he descended into hell and rose againe the third day that he ascended into heauen and sitteth at the right hand of his almightie father and from thence shal come to iudge the quicke and dead This hath been euer the catholyke fayth of christian people that Christ as concernyng his body and his manhood is in heauen and shall there continue vntyll he come doune at the last iudgement And forasmuche as the Crede maketh so expresse mencion of the article of his ascencion and departyng hence from vs if it had been an other article of oure fayth that his body taryeth also here with vs in yearth surely in this place of the Crede was so vrgēt an occasion geuen to make some mention therof that doutlesse it would not haue been passed ouer in our Crede with silence For i◠Christe as concernyng his humanitee be both here gone hence and both those two be articles of our fayth whan mencion was made of the one in the Crede it was necessary to make mencion of the other least by professyng the one we should be dissuaded from beleuyng the other beyng so contrarye the one to the other To this article of oure Crede accordeth holy scripture and all the olde auncient doctours of Christes churche For Christe himselfe saide I leaue the worlde and go to my father And also he saide You shall euer haue poore folkes with you but you shall not euer haue me with you And he gaue warninge of this errour beefore hande saying That the tyme wolde come whan many deceiuers shulde be in the worlde and saye Here is Christe and there is Christe but beleue theim not said Christ. And S. Marke writeth in the last chapiter of his gospell that y e Lorde Iesus was taken vp into heauen and sytteth at the ryghte hande of his father And S. Paule exhorteth all men to seeke for thinges that be aboue in heauen where Christe sayth he sitteth at the ryght hand of God hys father Also he saith that we haue such a bishop that sitteth in heauē at the ryght hand of the throne of Gods maiesty And that he hauing offred one sacrifice for sinnes sitteth continuallye at the right hande of God vntyll his enemyes be put vnder his feete as a foote stoole And herevnto consent all the olde doctoures of the churche Fyrste Origen vpon Mathew reasoneth this matter howe Christe maye be called a stranger that is departed into an other cūtrey seing that he is with vs alwai vnto the worldes end and is among al them that be gathered togither in his name and also in the middes of them that know him not And thus he reasoneth If he be here among vs stil how can he be gone hence as a strāger departed into an other contrey Wherevnto he answereth that Christe is both god and man hauinge in him two natures And as a manne he is not with vs vnto the worldes ende nor is present wyth all hys faythfull that bee gathered togyther in his name but his diuyne power and spirite is euer with vs. Paule saith he was absent from the Corinthes in his body when he was present wyth them in his spirite So is CHRIST sayth he gone hense and absent in his humanitee whiche in his diuine nature is euery where And in this saying saith Origene we diuide not his humanitee for S. Iohn writeth that no spirite that diuideth Iesus can be of God but we reserue to both his natures their owne properties In these wordes Origene hath plainly declared his mind that Christes body is not both present here with vs also
expounding these wordeÌ„s thei vary amoÌ„g them selfes which is a tokeÌ„ that thei be vncertain of their owne doctrine For some of them saye that by this pronoune demonstratiue this Christ vnderstode not the bread nor wyne but his body and bloud And other som say that by the pronoune this he ment nether the bread nor wyne nor his body nor bloud but that he ment a particular thyng vncertayne whiche they cal Indiuiduum vagum or Indiuiduum in genere I trow some Mathematicall quiditee they can not tell what But let all these Papistes together shew any one authoritee either of scripture or of auncient author either Greke or Latin that saith as thei say that Christ called not breade and wyne his body and bloud but Indiuiduum vagum and for my part I shall geue theim place and confesse that they say trewe And if they can shewe nothynge for theym of antiquitee but onely their owne bare wordes than it is reason that thei geue place to the truthe confirmed by so many authoritees both of scripture and of auncient writers which is that Christ called very material bread his body and very wyne made of grapes his bloud Nowe this beyng fully proued it must nedes folow consequently that this maner of speking is a figuratiue speeche For in playne and proper speche it is not true to saie that breadde is Christes body or wyne his bloud For Christes body hath a soule life sence reason but bread hath neither soule nor life sense nor reason Likewise in playne speche it is not true that we eate Christes body and drynke his bloude For eatynge and drynkynge in their proper and vsuall signification is with the tong teeth and lyppes to swalow diuide and chawe in peeces whiche thyng to do to the fleshe and bloudde of Christ is horrible to be heard of any christian So that these speches To eate Christes body and drynk his bloud be speches not taken in the proper signification of euery worde but by translation of these wordes eatyng and drinkyng from the signification of a corporal thyng to signifie a spiritual thyng and by callyng a thyng that signifieth by the name of the thyng which is signified therby Which is no rare nor straÌ„ge thyng but an vsual maner and phrase in coÌ„mon speeche And yet least this fault shulde be imputed vnto vs that we doo fayne thynges of our owne heades without authoritee as the Papistes bee accustomed to do here shalbe cited sufficient authoritee as well of scripture as of olde auncient authors to approue the same Fyrst when our sauiour Christ in the sixte of Iohn sayd that he was the bread of life the wheÌ„che whosoeuer did eate should not dye but liue for euer that the bread whiche he would geue vs was his fleshe and therefore whosoeuer should eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud should haue euerlastyng lyfe and they that should not eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud should not haue euerlastyng life When Christ had spoken these woordes with many mo of the eatyng of his fleshe and drinkyng of his bloud both the Iewes mani also of his disciples wer offended with his wordes and sayd This is an hard saiyng For howe can he geue vs his fleshe to be eaten Christ perceiuing their murmuring heartes because they knewe none other eatyng of his fleshe but by chawyng and swalowyng to declare that they should not eate his body after that sorte nor that he ment of any suche carnall eatyng he sayd thus vnto theim What if you see the sonne of man ascende vp where he was before It is the spirite that geueth life the fleshe auayleth nothyng The wordes whiche I spake vnto you be spirit and life These wordes our sauior Christ spake to lift vp their myndes froÌ„ yearth to heauen froÌ„ carnal to spiritual eatyng that thei should not phaÌ„tasy that they should with their trethe eate him preseÌ„tly here in yearth for his flesh so eateÌ„ sayth he should nothyng profite them And yet â—o thei should not eate him for he would take his body away from them and ascend with it into heuen And there by fayth not with teeth they should spiritually eate him sittyng at the right hand of his father And therfore sayth he The wordes whiche I do speake be spirite and life that is to say are not to be vnderstand that we shall eate Christ with our teethe grossely and carnally but that we shall spiritually gostly with our fayth eate him beyng carnally absent from vs in heauen And in suche wyse as Abraham and other holy fathers did eate him many yeres before he was incarnated and borne As S. Paule sayth that they did eate the same spiritual meate that wee do and dranke the same spirituall drynke that is to saye Christe For they spiritually by their fayth were fed and norished with Christes body and bloud and had eternal life by him before he was borne as we haue nowe that come after his ascencion Thus haue you hearde the declaracion of Christe him selfe and of sainct Paule that the eatyng and drinkyng of Christes fleshe bloud is not taken in the common signification with mouthe and teethe to eate and chawe a thyng beyng present but by a liuely fayth in heart and mynde to chawe and degest a thyng beyng absent either ascended hence into heauen or els not yet borne vpon yearth And Origene declaryng the sayd eatyng of Christes flesh and drinkyng of his bloud not to be vnderstand as the wordes do sound but figuratiuely wryteth thus vpon these woordes of Christ Except you eate my fleshe and drinke my bludde you shall not haue lyfe in you Considre saith Origen that these thinges written in gods bokes are figures and therefore examine and vnderstande them as spirituall and not as carnall men For if you vnderstand them as carnall menne they hurte you and feede you not For euen in the gospels is there founde letter that kylleth And not only in the olde testamente but also in the newe is there found lettre that slayeth him that doth not spiritually vnderstande that whiche is spoken For if thou folowe the lettre or woordes of this that Christe saide Excepte you eate my fleshe and drinke my bludde this lettre kylleth Who canne more plainlye expresse in any wordes that the eatinge and drinkinge of Christes fleshe and blood are not to be taken in common significacion as the wordes pretend and sound than Origene doth in this place And S. Iohn Chrysostom affirmeth the same saying that if any man vnderstand the woordes of Christ carnally he shall surely profite nothyng therby For what meane these woordes The fleshe auaileth nothinge He ment not of his fleshe god forbid but he ment of them that fleshely and carnally vnderstode those thynges that Christe spake But what is carnall vnderstanding To vnderstand the woordes simply as they be spoken and nothinge els For we ought not so to vnderstande the
thinges which we se but all misteries must be considered with inwarde eies and that is spirituallye to vnderstande theim In these wordes S. Iohn Chrysostome sheweth plainli that the words of Christ cōcerning the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blud are not to be vnderstande simply as they be spoken but spiritually and figuratiuely And yet most plainly of all other S. Augustine doth declare this mater in his boke De doctrina christiana in which boke he instructeth christian people how they should vnderstande those places of scripture which seem hard and obscure Seldō saith he is ani difficulty in proper wordes but either the circumstāce of y e place or y e conferring of diuers translatiōs or els the original tonge wherin it was written wyl make the seuce plaine But in woorde that be altered from their propre significatiō there is great diligence and heed to be takē And specially we must beware that w◠take not literally any thing that is spoken figuratiuely Nor contrary wise we must not take for a figure any thing that is spoken properly Therfore muste be declared saith S. Augustine the manner how to discerne a propre speache from a figuratiue wherin saith he must be obserued this rule that if the thing which is spokē be to y e furtherance of charite than it is a propre speache no figure So that if it be a cōmaundemēt that forbiddeth any euel or wicked act or commaundeth any good or beneficiall thing than it is no figure But if it commaūd any yll or wicked thinge or forbid any thing that is good and beneficiall than is it a figuratiue speache Nowe this saying of Christ Excepte you eate the fleshe of the sonne of manne and drinke his bloode you shall haue no lyfe in you seemeth to commaunde an haynous and a wicked thynge therefore it is a figure commaundynge vs to be partakers of Christes passion keeping in our mindes to our great comfort and profite that his flesh was crucified and woūded for vs. This is briefly the sentence of S. Augustine in his booke De doctrina christiana And the lyke he writeth in his booke De catechisandis rudibus and in his booke Contra aduersarium legis prophetarum and in diuers other places which for tediousnes I passe ouer For if I shuld reherse al y e authorities of S. Augustin and other which make mentiō of this matter it woulde weary the reader to muche Wherefore to all them that by any reasonable meanes wyll bee satysfyed these thinges before rehearsed are suffyciente to proue that the eatynge of Christes fleshe and drinkynge of hys blood ys not to be vnderstand symplye and plainely as the woordes do properly sygnyfye that we do eat and drink hym with our mouths but it is a figuratiue speach spiritually to be vnderstand that we must depely print and frutefully beleue in our hartes that hys flesh was crucifyed and his blud shed for our redemption And this our beliefe in him is to eate hys fleshe and to drynk hys blud although they be not present here with vs but be ascēded into heauē As once forefathers before Christs time did likewise eat hys fleshe and drunke his bludde which was so farre from them that he was not yet then borne The same authors did say also y t whē Christ called the breade his body and the wine his blud it was no propre speache that he than vsed but as al sacramentes be figures of other thinges and yet haue the very names of the thinges whiche they do signifye so Christ institutinge the sacrament of his most precious body and bloode dyd vse figuratiue speaches callynge the breade by the name of his bodye bycause it signified hys body and the wyne he called his bloude bicause it represented his bloude Tertulian herein writing against Martion sayth these wordes Christ did not reproue bread wherby he did represent hys very body And in the same booke he saith that Iesus taking bread distributing it amonges his disciples made it his body saying This is my body that is to saye saith Tertulian a figure of my body And therefore saithe Tertuliane that Christe called breade his body and wyne his bloode bycause that in the olde Testament breade and wyne were figures of his body and bloode And sainct Cyprian the holy martyr saythe of this matter that Christes bloode is snewed in the wyne and the people in the water that is mixte with the wyne so that the mixture of the water to the wyne signifieth the spirituall commixtion and ioynynge of vs vnto Christe By which similitude Cyprian ment not that the bloud of Christ is vyne or the people water but as the water doth signifie represēt the people so doth the wyne signify and represent Christes bloud and the vnityng of the water and wyne together signifyeth the vnityng of christē people vnto Christ him selfe And thesame sainct Cyprian in another place writyng hereof sayth that Christ in his last supper gaue to his Apostles with his own hādes bread and wyne whiche he called his fleshe and bloud but in the crosse he gaue his very body to be wounded with the handes of the souldiours that the Apostles might declare to the worlde howe and in what maner bread and wyne may be the flesh and bloud of Christ. And the maner he straight wayes declareth thus That those thinges whiche do signifye those thinges whiche be signifyed by them may be both called by one name Here it is certayne by sainct Cyprians mynd wherfore in what wise bread is called Christes flesh and wyne his bloud that is to say because that euery thyng that representeth signifyeth another thyng may be called by the name of the thyng whiche it signifyeth And therfore sainct Ihon Chrysostome sayth that Christ ordayned the table of his holy supper for this purpose that in that sacrament he should dayly shewe vnto vs bread and wyne for a similitude of his body and bloud Sainct Hierome likewyse sayth vpō the gospel of Mathew that Christ tooke bread whiche comforteth mans heart that he might represent therby his very body and bloud Also S. Ambrose if the booke bee his that is intiteled De hijs que misterijs initiātur sayth that before the cōsecration another kynde is named but after the consecracion the body of Christ is signified Christ sayd his bloud before the consecracion it is called another thyng but after the consecracion is signified the bloud of Christ. And in his boke De sacramentis if that be also his he writeth thus Thou doest receiue the sacrament for a similitude of the fleshe and bloud of Christ but thou doest obtain the grace vertue of his true nature And receiuyng the bread in that foode thou arte partaker of his godly substāce And in y e same boke he sayth As thou hast in baptisme receiued the similitude of deth so like wise
doest thou in this sacrament drinke the similitude of Christes precious bloud And againe he sayth in y e sayd boke The priest sayth Make vnto vs this oblaciō to be acceptable whiche is the figure of the body and bloud of our lord Iesu Christ. And vpon the Epistle of sainct Paule to the Corinthians he sayth that in eatyng and drinkyng the bread and wyne we do signifie the flesh and bloud whiche were offered for vs. And the old testament he sayth was instituted in bloud because that bloud was a wytnes of Gods benefite in significacion and figure wherof wee take the mistical cuppe of his bloud to the tuition of our body and soule Of these places of sainct Chrysostome sainct Hierom and sainct Ambrose it is cleare that in the sacramentall bread and wyne is not really and corporally the very natural substance of the flesh and bloud of Christ but that the bread and wyne be similitudes mysteries and representacions significations sacramentes figures and signes of his body and bloud and therefore be called and haue the name of his very fleshe and bloud And yet S. Augustyne sheweth this matter more clearely and fully than any of the rest specially in an Epistle which he wrote ad Bonifatiū where he sayth that a day or two before good fryday we vse in common speeche to say thus To morowe or this day .ii. dayes Christ suffered his passion where in very dede he neuer suffered his passion but ones and that was many yeres passed Lykewise vpō Easter day we say This day Christ rose frō death where in very deede it is many hundred yeres sithens he rose frō death Why than do not menne reproue vs as lyers when we speake in this sort But because we cal these dayes so by a similitude of those dayes wherein these thynges were done in deede And so it is called that day whiche is not that day in dede but by the course of the yere is a like day And suche thinges be sayd to bee done that day for y e solemne celebracion of the sacramēt which thinges in dede were not done that day but lōg before Was Christ offereed any more but ones And he offered him selfe yet in a sacrament or representacion not onely euery solemne feast of Easter but euery day he is offered to the people so that he doth not lye that saith he is euery day offered For if sacramentes had not some similitude or likenes of those thynges whereof they be sacramentes they could in no wyse bee sacramentes And for their similitude and lykenes commonly they haue the name of the thynges whereof they bee sacramētes Therfore as after a certayne maner of speeche the sacrament of Christes body is Christes body the sacrament of Christes bloud is Christes bloud so lykewise the sacramēt of fayth is fayth And to beleue is nothyng els but to haue fayth And therfore whē we answere for yong children in their baptisme that thei beleue whiche haue not yet the mynd to beleue we answere that they haue fayth because they haue the sacramēt of fayth And we say also that they turne vnto God because of the sacrament of the cōuersion vnto God for that answer partaineth to the celebracion of the sacrament And likewyse speaketh the Apostle of Baptisme saiyng that by Baptisme wee bee buryed with him into death he sayth not that wee signifie burial but he sayth plainly that we be buried So that the sacrament of so great a thing is not called but by the name of the thyng it selfe Hytherto I haue rehersed the answere of S. Augustine vnto Boniface a learned Byshoppe who asked of him howe the parentes frendes coulde answere for a yong babe in baptisme and saye in his person that he beleueth and conuerteth vnto God when the childe can neither doo nor thinke any suche thinge Whervnto the answere of S. Augustine is this that for as muche as baptisme is the sacramente of the profession of our faith and of our conuersion vnto God it becometh vs so to answere for yong children comming thervnto as to that sacrament appertaineth although the children in deede haue no knowledge of suche thinges And yet in our said answeres we ought not to be reprehended as vain men or liers forasmuche as in cōmon speche we vse daily to cal sacramēts and figures by the names of the things that be signified by them although thei be not the same thing in dede As euery Good fryday as oftē as it returneth from yere to yere we cal it the dai of Christes passion and euery Easter daye we call the day of his resurrection and euery day in the yeare we saye that Christe is offered and the sacrament of his body we call it his body and the sacramēt of his blud we cal it his blud and our baptism S. Paul calleth our burial with Christ And yet in very deede Christe neuer suffered but ones neuer arose but ones neuer was offered but ones nor in very dede in baptisme we be not buried nor the sacrament of Christs body is not his bodye nor the sacrament of his bloud is not his bloud But so they be called bycause they be figures sacraments and representacions of the thinges theym selfe whiche they signifye and whereof they beare the name Thus doth S. Augustine most plainly open this matter in his epistle to Bonifacius Of this maner of speache wherein a signe is called by the name of the thing which it signifieth speaketh S. Augustine also right largly in his questions super Leuiticum contra Adamantium declaring how bloud in scripture is called the soule A thing which signifieth saith he is wont to be called by the name of the thing whiche it signifieth as it is written in the scripture The vii eares be vii yeares The scripture saith not signyfieth vii yeares And vii kine be vii years and many other lyke And so saide S. Paule that the stone was Christe and not that it signified Christ but euen as it had bin he in deed which neuertheles was not Christ by substance but by significaciō Euen so saith S. August bicause the bloud signifieth representeth the soul therfore in a sacramente or significacion it is called the sowle And Cōtra Adamantiū he writeth much like saying In such wise is blud y e soule as the stone was Christ yet thapostle saith nor that the stone signified Christ but saith it was Christ. And this sentence Bloud is the soule may be vnderstand to be spokē in a signe or figure for Christ did not stick to say This is my body when he gaue the signe of his body Here S. Augustine rehersing diuers sentences which were spoken figuratiuely that is to saye whan one thinge was called by the name of an other and yet was not the other in substance but in significacion as that bludde is the soule vii kyne be vii yeares vii eares be vii yeares the stone
of the Lordes bodye And by and by foloweth So many hostes muste bee offered in the altare as wyll suffice for the people And yf any remayn they must not be kept vntill the mornyng but be spent and consumed of the clearkes with feare and tremblynge And they that consume the residue of the Lordes bodye may not by and by take other common meates least they shoulde mixte that holy portion with the meate which is dygested by the bealy and auoyded by the foundament Therfore if the Lordes portion bee eaten in the mornynge the ministers that consume it must faste vnto sixe of the clocke and if thei do take it at thre or four of the clocke the minister must fast vntyl the euenyng Thus much writeth Clement of this matter If the Epistle which they alledge were Clementes as in dede it is not But they haue fayned many thynges in other mennes names thereby to stablyshe their fayned purposes But whose so euer the Epistle was if it be throughly consydered it maketh muche more agaynst the Papâ—stes than for their pourpose For by the same Epistle appereth euidently thre speciall thyngs against the errours of the Papistes The fyrst is that the breade in the sacramente is called the Lordes body and the peeces of the broken bread be called the peeces and fragmentes of the Lordes body whyche can not bee vnderstande but fyguratiuely The seconde is that the bread oughte not to be reserued and hanged vp as the Papistes euery where doo vse The third is that the priests ought not to receyue the sacrament alone as the Papistes commonly do makyng a sale therof vnto the people but they ought to coÌ„municate with the people And here it is diligently to bee noted that we ought not vnreuerently and vnaduisedly to approche vnto the meate of the Lordes table as we doo to other common meates and drynkes but with great feare and dreade least we shulde come to that holy table vnworthely wherein is not onely represented but also spirytually geuen vnto vs very CHRISTE hym selfe And therfore we ought to come to that boord of the Lorde with all reuerence faythe loue and charitee feare and dread accordyng to the same Here I passeouer Ignatius and Ireneus whiche make nothyng for the Papistes opinions but stand in the commendacion of the holy Communion and in exhortacion of all men to the often and godly receiuyng therrof And yet neither they nor no manne els can extolle and coÌ„mende the same sufficiently accordyng to the dignitee therof if it bee godly vsed as it ought to be Dionysius also whom they allege to praise extoll this sacrament as in dede it is most worthy beyng a sacrament of moste high dignitee and perfection representyng vnto vs our moste perfect spiritual coniunction vnto Christ oure continual norishyng feadyng comforte spiritual life in him yet he neuer sayd that the fleshe and bloud of Christ was in the bread and wyne really corporally sensibly and naturally as the Papistes wold beare vs in hand but he calleth euer the bread and wyne signes pledges and tokens declaryng vnto the faythfull receiuers of the same that they receiue Christ spiritually and that they spiritually eate his flesh drynke his bloud And although the bread and wyne bee the figures signes and tokens of Christes fleshe and bloud as sainct Dionyse calleth them bothe before the consecracion and after yet the Greke annotations vpon the same Dionyse do say that the very thynges them selfes be aboue in heauen And as the same Dionyse maketh nothing for the Papistes opinions in this point of Christes reall and corporall presence so in diuers other things he maketh quite and clean against them and that specially in thre pointes In transubstantiation in reseruacion of the sacrament and in the receauinge of the same by the priest alone Furthermore they do alleage Tertulian that hee constantly affirmeth that in the sacramente of the altare we do eate the body and drinke the blud of our sauiour Christ. To whoÌ„ we graunte that our flesh eateth and drinketh the bread and wyne whiche be called the bodye and bloude of Christ bicause as Tertulian saith they do represent his body and bloude although they bee not really the same in very deed And we graunt also that oure soules by faith do eate his verye body and drinke his bludde but that is spiritually suckinge out of the same euerlastinge lyfe But we deny that vnto this spirituall feedinge is required any reall and corporall presence And therefore this Tertulian speaketh nothinge against the truthe of our catholicke doctrine but he speaketh many thinges most plainly for vs and against the Papistes and specially in thre pointes Firste in that he saithe that Christe called breade his body The second that Christ called it so bycause it representeth his bodye The thirde in that he saithe that by these wordes of Christe This is my bodye is mente This is a figure of my body Moreouer they allege for theym Origen because they would seeme to haue many aunciente authors fauourers of their erronious doctrine whiche Origen is moste clearely against them For although hee do saye as they allege that those things which before were signified by obscure figures be nowe truely in dede and in theyr very nature and kinde accomplished and fulfilled And for the declaration therof he bringeth forth thre examples One of the stone that floweth water an other of the sea and cloude and the thirde of Manna whiche in the olde testamente did signifie Christ to come who is now come in deed and is manifested and exhibited vnto vs as it were face to face and sensibly in his worde in the sacrament of regeneracion and in the sacramentes of breade and wine Yet Origene mente not that Christ is corporally either in his worde or in the water of baptime or in the breade and wine nor that we carnally and corporally be regenerated and borne againe or eate Christes flesh blood For our regeneracion in Christ is spiritual and our eating and drinking is a spirituall feeding which kinde of regeneration and feeding requireth no real and corporall presence of Christ but onlye his presence in spirite grace and effectuall operacion And that Origen thus mente that Christes fleshe is a spirituall meate and his bludde a spirituall drinke and that the eating and drynkinge of his fleshe and bloude maye not bee vnderstande literallye but spirytually it is manifested by Origenes owne woordes in his seuenth homylye vppon the booke called Leuiticus where hee sheweth that those wordes must bee vnderstande figuratiuely and who so euer vnderstandeth theim otherwise they bee deceaued and take harme by their owne grosse vnderstandinge And likewise ment Cypriane in those places whiche the aduersaries of the truthe alleadge of hym concernynge the true eatinge of Christes very fleshe and drinkinge of his bludde For Cyprian spake of no grosse and carnal eatinge with the mouth but of an inward
spirituall and pure eatinge with hart and mind which is to beeleue in oure hartes that his fleshe was â—ente and torne for vs vppon the crosse and his bludde shedde for our redemption and that the same fleshe and bludde nowe sitteth at the ryght hande of the father making continual intercession for vs and to imprint and digest this in our mindes puttinge our whole affiaunce and trust in him as touchinge our saluacion and offering ourselues clearlye vnto hym to loue and serue hym all the dayes of our lyfe thys is trewely sincerely and spiritually to eate his flesh and to drinke his bludde And this sacryfyce of Christe vpon the crosse was that oblation whyche Cypriane saithe was figured and signifyed before it was done by the wyne whiche Noe dranke and by the breade and wyne whiche Melchisedech gaue to Abraham and by many other figures which Cyprian there reherseth And nowe when Christe is come and hath accomplished that sacrifice the same is figured signified and represented vnto vs by that bread and wine which faithfull people receaue daylye in the holy communion Wherein lyke as wyth their mouths carnally thei eat the bread drink the wyne so by their faithe spiritually they eate Christes very fleshe and drinke his very bloode And herby it appeareth that S. Cyprian clearly affirmeth the moste true doctrine and is wholy vpon oure side And against the Papistes hee teacheth moste plainly that the communion ought to be receaued of all men vnder bothe the kindes and that CHRIST called breade his body and wyne hys bloude and that there is no transubstantiation but that breade remaineth there as a figure to represent Christes body and wine to represente his blud and that those whyche bee not y â— lyuely membres of Christe doo eate the breade and drynke the wyne and bee nouryshed by theym but the verye fleshe and bludde of CHRIST they neyther eate nor drinke Thus haue you hearde declared the mynde of Saint Cyprian But Hylarius thynke they is plainest for theym in this matter whose woordes they translate thus If the worde was made verely fleshe we verely receiue the worde beyng fleshe in our Lordes meate howe shall not Christ be thought to dwel naturally in vs who beyng borne man hath taken vnto him the nature of our fleshe that can not be seuered and hath put together the nature of his fleshe to the nature of his eternitee vnder the sacrament of the communion of his fleshe vnto vs. For so wee bee all one because the father is in Christe and Christe in vs. Wherfore whosoeuer will denye the father to be naturally in Christe he muste denye fyrste either him selfe to be naturally in Christ or Christ to be naturally in him For the beyng of the father in Christe and the beyng of Christ in vs maketh vs to be one in them And therfore if Christ haue taken verily the fleshe of our body and the man that was verely borne of the virgyn Mary is Christ and also we receiue vnder the true mysterye the fleshe of his body by meanes whereof wee shall bee one for the father is in Christ and Christ in vs how shall that be called the vnitee of wylle when the naturall propertie brought to passe by the sacrament is the sacrament of vnitee Thus doth the Papistes the aduersaries of Gods woorde and of his trueth allege the authoritee of Hilarius either peruersely and purposely as it seemeth vntruely cityng him and wrastyng his wordes to their purpose or els not truely vnderstandyng him For although he sayth that Christe is naturally in vs yet he sayth also that we be naturally in him And neuerthelesse in so saiyng he ment not of the natural and corporal presence of the substance of Christes body of ours for as oure bodyes bee not after that sorte within his body so is not his body after that sorte within our bodyes but he ment that Christe in his incarnacion receyued of vs a mortall nature and vnited the same vnto his diuinitee and so be we naturally in him And the sacramentes of Baptisme and of his holy supper if we rightly vse the same do moste assuredly certifye vs that wee bee partakers of his godly nature hauyng geuen vnto vs by him immortalitee and life euerlastyng so is Christ naturally in vs. And so bee wee one with Christ and Christ with vs not onely in wylle mynde but also in very naturall properties And so concludeth Hilarius against Arrius that Christe is one with his father not in purpose and wylle onely but also in very nature And as the vnion betwene Christe and vs in baptisme is spiritual and requyreth no real and corporall presence so lykewise oure vnion with Christ in his holy supper is spiritual and therfore requyreth no real and corporall presence And therfore Hilarius speaking there of both the sacramentes maketh no difference betwene our vnion with Christ in baptisme our vnion with him in his holy supper And sayth further that as Christ is in vs so be wee in him â–ª whiche the Papistes can not vnderstand corporally and really except they wyll say that all our bodyes be corporally within Christes body Thus is Hilarius answered vnto both plainly shortly And this answere of Hilarius wyll serue also vnto Cyril whom they allege to speake after the same sort that Hilarius doth that Christ is naturally in vs. The wordes whiche they recite be these We denye not sayth Cyril against the heretike but we be spiritually ioyned to Christ by fayth and syncere charitee but that we shuld haue no maner of coniunction in our fleshe with Christ that we vtterly deny and thynke it vtterly discrepant from Goddes holy scriptures For who doubteth but Christ is so the vyne tre we so the branches as we get thence our life Heare what sainct Paule sayth Wee be all one body with Christe for though we be many we be one in him All we participate in one foode Thynketh this hereticke that we knowe not the strength and vertue of the mistical benediction whiche when it is made in vs doth it not make Christ by coÌ„munication of his fleshe to dwell corporally in vs Why be the membres of faythful mens bodyes called the membres of Christe Knowe you not sayth sainct Paule that your membres be the membres of Christ And shall I make the membres of Christ partes of the whoores body God forbyd And our sauiour also sayth He that eateth my fleshe and drynketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him Although in these wordes Cyril doth say that Christ doth dwell corporally in vs whan we receiue y â— mistical benediction yet he neither sayth that Christ dwelleth corporally in the bread nor that he dwelleth in vs corporally onely at suche tymes as wee receiue the sacrament nor that he dwelleth in vs not we in him but he sayth aswel y t we dwel in him as that he dwelleth in vs. Whiche dwellyng is
neither corporal nor local but an heauenly spiritual supernatural dwellyng wherby so long as we dwell in him he in vs we haue by him euerlastyng life And therfore Cyril sayth in the same place that Christ is the vyne and wee the braunches because that by him wee haue life For as the braunches receiue lyfe and nourishement of the body of the vyne so receiue we by him the natural propertie of his body whiche is life and immortalitee by that meanes we beyng his membres do liue and are spiritually norished And this ment Cyril by this worde Corporally when he sayth that Christ dwelleth corporally in vs. And the same ment also sainct Hilarius by this woorde Naturally whan he sayd that Christ dwelleth naturally in vs. And as sainct Paule whan he sayd that in Christ dwelleth the full diuinitee Corporally by this worde Corporally he ment not that the diuinitee is a body so by that body dwelleth bodely in Christ. But by this worde Corporally he ment that the diuinitee is not in Christ accidentally lightly and slenderly but substantially and perfectely wyth all hys mighte and power so that CHRIST was not onely a mortall manne to suffre for vs but also hee was immortall God able to redeeme vs. So S. Cyril whan he sayd that Christ is in vs corporally he mente that we haue him in vs not lightly and to small effecte and purpose but that we haue him in vs substantially pythelye and effectually in suche wise that wee haue by hym redemption and euerlastinge lyfe And this I sucke not out of myne owne fyngers but haue it of Cyrils owne expresse words where he saith A lyttle benediction draweth the whole manne to god and filleth him with grace and after this manner Christe dwelleth in vs and we in CHRIST But as for corporall eatinge and drinkinge with our mouths and digesting with our bodies Cyril neuer ment that Christ doth so dwel in vs as he plainly declareth Our sacrament saith he doth not affirme the eatinge of a manne drawynge wickedly christen people to haue grosse imaginacions and carnal fantasies of suche thinges as be fine and pure receiued onely with a sincere faithe But as twoo waxes that be molten put togither they close so in one that euery part of the one is ioyned to euery parte of the other euen so saith Cyril he that receiueth the flesh and bloode of the Lord muste needes bee so ioyned with Christ that Christ must be in him and he in Christ. By these wordes of Cyril appeareth his mind plainly that wee maye not grossely and rudelye thinke of the eating of Christ with our mouths but with our faith by which eatinge although he be absente hence bodely and be in the eternall life and glorye with his father yet we bee made partakers of hys nature to bee immortal and haue eternall lyfe and glorye with him And thus is declared the minde aswell of Cyryll as of Hylarius And here may be wel enough passed ouer Basilius Gregorius Nissenus and Gregorius Nazianzenus partely bycause they speake lyttle of this mattier and partely bycause they maye bee easyly aunswered vnto by that which is before declared and often repeted whiche is that a fygure hath the name of the thing wherof it is the figure and therefore of the fygure maye be spoken the same thinge that maye be spoken of the thynge it selfe And as concerninge the eatinge of Christes fleshe and drinkinge of his bludde they spake of the spirituall eatinge and drinkinge thereof by faith and not of corporall eating and drnkinge with the mouth and teethe Likewise Eusebius Emissenus is shortly answered vnto for he speaketh not of any real and corporall conuersion of breade and wyne into Christes body and bludde nor of any corporall and reall eating and drinkinge of the same but hee speaketh of a sacramentall conuersion of bread and wyne and of a spirituall eatinge and drynkyng of the body and bloode After whiche sorte Christe is as well present in baptisme as the same Eusebius plainly there declareth as he is in the Lordes table Which is not carnally and corporally but by faithe and spiritually But of thys authour is spoken beefore more at large in the matter of transubstantiation fo 24. And now I wyll come to the saying of S. Ambrose whiche is alwaies in their mouthes Before the consecration saith he as they allege it is bread but after the woordes of consecration it is the body of Chryste For answere herevnto yt muste be fyrste knowen what Consecration is Consecration is the separation of anye thing from a prophane and wordely vse vnto a spirituall and godly vse And therfore whan vsual and common water is taken frome other vses and put to the vse of baptisme in the name of the father and of the sonne and of the holy ghost than it may rightly be called Consecrated water that is to saye water put to an holy vse Euen so whan cōmon bread wine be taken seuered frō other bread and wyne to the vse of y e holy cōmunion that portion of bread and wyne although it be of the same substance that the other is frō the whych it is seuered yet it is nowe called consecrated or holy bread and holy wyne Not that the bread and wine haue or can haue any holynes in them but that they be vsed to an holy worke and represent holy godly thinges And therfore S. Dionyse calleth the breade holy breade and the cuppe an holy cuppe as soone as they bee sette vppon the aultate to the vse of the holy communion But specially they maye be called holye and consecrated when they be separated to that holy vse of Christes owne wordes whiche he spake for that purpose saying of the breade This is my body And of the wyne This is my bloude So that commonly the authors before those wordes be spoken do take the breade and wyne but as other common bread and wine but after those woordes be pronounced ouer theym than they take theym for consecrated and holy breade and wyne Not that the bread and wine can be partakers of any holynes or godlynesse or can be the body and bloode of Christ but that they represent the very bodye and bloude of Christe and the holy foode and nourishement which we haue by him And so thei be called by the names of the body bloud of Christ as the signe token and figure is called by the name of the very thinge whiche it sheweth and signifieth And therefore as S. Ambrose in the wordes before cited by the aduersaries saith that beefore the consecration it is bread and after the cōsecration it is Christes body so in other places he dothe more plainly sette forth his meaninge saying these wordes Before the benediction of the heauenly wordes it is called an other kinde of thinge but after the consecration is signified the body of
but he doth tourne the very bread and wyne into the very fleshe and bloude of Christe These be the wordes whyche the Papistes do cite out of Theophilus vpon the gospel of saint Marke But by this one place it appeereth euidently either howe negligente the Papistes bee in serchyng out and examynyng the saiynges of the authors which they allege for their purpose or els howe false and deceytfull they be whyche willyngly and wittyngly haue made in this one place and as it were with one breath two loude and shamefull lyes The first is that bycause they wolde geue the more authorite to the woordes by them alleged they like fals Potycaties that sell quid pro quo falsifie the authors name fatherynge suche sayenges vpon Theophilus Alexandrinus an olde and auncient author whiche were in dede none of his wordes but wer the wordes of Theophilactus who was many yeres after Theophilus Alexandrinus But suche hathe euer been the Papisticall subtiltees to set forth their owne inuentions dreames and lyes vnder the name of antiquitee and auncient Authors The second lye or falshod is that thei falsifie the authors wordes and meanyng subuertynge the truth of his doctrine For where Theophylactus accordynge to the catholike doctrine of auncient authors sayth that almightie God cōdescēdyng to our infirmitee reserueth the kynde of bread wyne and yet tourneth them into the vertue of Christes fleshe and bloud They saye that he reserueth the formes and apparances of bread wyne and turneth them into the Uerite of his fleshe and bloud so tornyng and alteryng kyndes into fourmes and apparances and vertue into Ueritee that of the vertue of the fleshe and bloud thei make the veritee of his flesh and bloud And thus haue they falsified as well the name as the wordes of Theophilactus turnyng veritee into playne and flatte falsitee But to sette foorth playnely the meanyng of Theophylactus in this matter ▪ As hot and burnyng yron is yron styll and yet hath the force of fyer and as the fleshe of Christ styl remainynge fleshe geueth lyfe as the flesshe of hym that is God so the sacramentall bread wyne remayne styll in their propre kyndes and yet to them that worthyly eate and drynke them they be tourned not into the corporall presence but into the vertue of Christes fleshe and bloud And although Theophylactus spake of the eatyng of the very body of Christ and the drinkyng of his very bloud and not only of the figures of them and of the cōuersion of the bread and wyne into the body and bloud of Christ yet he meaneth not of a grosse carnal corporall and sensible conuersion of the breade and wyne nor of a lyke eatyng and drynkynge of his fleshe and bloud for so not only our stomakes wold yerne and oure heartes abhorre to eate his fleshe and to drynke his bloude but also suche eatyng and drynkynge could nothyng profit and auayle vs but he spake of the celestial and spiritual eatyng of Christ and of a sacramental conuersion of the bread callyng the bread not onely a figure but also the bodye of Christ◠geuynge vs by those woordes to vnderstande that in the sacramente wee not onely eate corporally the bread whyche is a sacrament and figure of Christes body but spiritually we eate also his very body drynke his very bloud And this doctrine of Theophilactus is both true godly and comfortable Besides this our aduersaries doo allege saint Hierome vpon the Epistle ad Titum that there is as great difference betwene the loaues called Panes propositionis and the body of Christe as there is betwene a shadowe of a bodye and the body it selfe and as there is betwene an ymage and the thyng it self and betwene an example of thynges to come and the thynges that be prefigured by them These wordes of saincte Hierome truely vnderstand serue nothyng for thentent of the Papistes For he ment that the Shew breade of the lawe was but a darke shadow of Christ to come but the sacrament of Christes body is a clere testimony that Christ is already comme that he hath performed that whiche was promysed and doth presently comforte and feede vs spiritually with his precious body and bloud not withstandyng that corporally he is ascended into heuen And the same is to be answered vnto all that the aduersaries bryng of S. Augustin Sedulius Leo Fulgentius Cassiodorus Gregorius and other concernyng the eatyng of Christe in the sacrament Which thyng can not be vnderstanded plainly as the wordes sounde but fyguratiuely and spiritually as before is sufficiently proued and herafter shalbe more fully declared in the fourth parte of this booke But here Iohn Damascene maye in no wyse be passed ouer whom for his auctoritee the aduersaries of Christes true naturall bodye do reken as a stout champion sufficient to defend all the whole matter alone But neyther is the authoritee of Damascene so greate that they may oppresse vs thereby nor his woordes so playne for them as they boaste and vntruely pretende For he is but a yonge newe author in the respect of those which we haue brought in for our party And in diuers pointes he varieth frō the most ancient authors if he meane as thei expound him as when he saith that the bread and wine be not figures which all the old authors call figures and that the bread and wyne consume not nor be auoyded downewarde which Origen and S. Augustine affirme or that they be not called the examples of Christes body after the consecration whiche shall manyfestely appere false by the Liturgy ascribed vnto S. Basill And moreouer the sayde Damascene was one of the byshoppe of Romes chiefe proctoures against the Emperours and as it were his ryght hande to set abroade all ydolatrye by his owne handewrytynge And therefore yf he loste his hande as they saye he dyd he lost it by Goddes moste righteous iudgemente what soeuer they faine and fable of the miraculous restitution of the same And yet what so euer the sayd Damascene writeth in other mattiers surely in this place wiche the aduersaries doo alledge he writeth spiritually and godly although the Papistes either of ignorance mystake hym or els willyngly wraste him and writhe hym to their purpose cleane contrary to his meanynge The sum of Damascene his doctrine in this matter is this That as Christ beyng both God man hath in him two natures so hath he twoo natiuitees one eternal thother temporall And so lykewise we beyng as it were double men or hauyng euery one of vs two men in vs the new man the old man the spirituall man the carnall man haue a double natiuitee One of oure first carnall father Adam by whom as by ancient inheritance cometh vnto vs malediction and euerlastyng damnation the other of our heauenly Adam that is to saye of Christ by whom we be made heires of celestiall benediction and euerlastyng glory and immortalitee And bycause this
Adam is spirituall therefore our generation by hym muste be spirituall our feedyng muste bee lykewise spirituall And our spirituall generation by hym is playnly set forth in baptisme and our spirituall meate and foode is set foorth in the holy Cōmunion supper of the Lorde And because our sightes bee so feble that we cannot see the spiritual water wherwith we be washed in baptisme nor the spiritual meat wherwith we be fedde at the Lordes table therfore to healpe oure infirmities and to make vs the better to see the same with a pure fayth our sauiour Christ hath set furth the same as it were before our eyes by sensible signes and tokens whiche we be daily vsed and accustomed vnto And because the common custome of men is to washe in water therfore our spiritual regeneration in Christe or spirituall washyng in his blud is declared vnto vs in baptisme by water Lykewise oure spiritual norishement feadyng in Christ is sette before oure eyes by bread and wyne because they be meates and drynkes whiche chiefly and vsually we be fedde withal that as they feade the body so doth Christe with his fleshe and bloud spiritually feade the soule And therefore the bread and wyne bee called examples of Christes fleshe and bloud and also they be called his very fleshe and blode to signifie vnto vs that as they feade vs carnally so do they admonishe vs that Christe with his fleshe and bloud doth feade vs spiritually and moste truely vnto euerlastyng life And as almyghty God by his moste myghty worde and his hollye spirite and infinite power brought forth all creatures in the begynnyng and euer sithens hath preserued theym euen so by the same worde and power he woorketh in vs from time to tyme this meruailous spiritual generation wonderfull spirituall norishment feedyng which is wrought onely by God and is comprehended and receiued of vs by fayth And as bread and drynke by natural norishement be chaunged into a mannes body and yet the body is not chaunged but the same that it was before so although the bread and wyne be sacramentally chaunged into Christes body yet his body is the same and in the same place that it was before that is to say in heauen without any alteracion of the same And the bread and wyne bee not so chaunged into the fleshe and bloud of Christ that they bee made one nature but they remayne styll distinct in nature so that the bread in it selfe is not his fleshe the wyne his bloud but vnto them that worthely eate and drinke the bread and wyne to them the bread and wyne be his flesh and bloud that is to say by thynges naturall and whiche they be accustomed vnto they bee exalted vnto thynges aboue nature For y ◠sacramental bread and wyne be not base and naked figures but so pithy and effectuous that whosoeuer worthely eateth them eateth spiritually Christes fleshe and bloud and hath by them euerlastyng life Wherfore whosoeuer cōmeth to the Lordes table must come with all humilitee feare reuerence and puritie of life as to receiue not onely bread and wyne but also our sauior Christ both God and man with al his benefites to the relief and sustētacion both of their bodies and soules This is briefly the summe and true meanyng of Damascene concernyng this matter Wherfore they that gather of hym either the natural presence of Christes body in the sacramētes of bread and wyne or the adoration of the outward and visible sacrament or that after the cōsecracion there remayneth no bread nor wyne nor other substaunce but onely the substaunce of the body and bloude of Christe eyther they vnderstand not Damascen or els of wilful frowardnes they wyll not vnderstande hym whyche rather seemeth to bee true by suche collections as they haue vniustly gathered noted out of him For although he say that Christe is the spirituall meate yet as in baptisme the holy ghost is not in the water but in hym that is vnfaynedly baptised so Damascene ment not y t Christ is in the bread but in hym y t worthily eateth the bred And though he say that the bread is Christes body and the wyne his bloud yet he mente not that the bread considered in it selfe or the wyne in it selfe beyng not receyued is his fleshe and bloud but to suche as by vnfayned faith woorthely receyue the breade and wyne to suche the breade and wyne are called by Damascene the body and bloude of Christe bycause that suche persons through the workyng of the holy gost be so knytte and vnited spirituallye to Christes fleshe and bloude and to his diuinitee also that they bee fedde with them vnto euerlastyng life Furthermore Damascene sayeth not that the sacrament should be worshipped and adored as the Papistes terme it whiche is playne ydolatrye but we must worship Christ God and man And yet we may not worship him in bread and wyne but sittyng in heauen with his father and beyng spiritually within our selues Nor he sayeth not that there remayneth no bread nor wyne nor none other substaunce but onely the substaunce of the body and bloud of Christe but he sayeth playnely that as a burnyng coale is not wodde onely but fyre wodde ioyned together so the bread of the Cōmunion is not bread onely but bread ioyned to the diuinitee But those that say that there is none other substance but the substāce of the body and bloud of Christe doo not onely denye that there is bread and wyne but by force they must denye also that there is either Christes diuinitee or his soule For if the fleshe and bloud the soule and diuinitee of Christe bee foure substances and in the sacrament be but two of them that is to say his fleshe and bloud than where be his soule and diuinitee And thus these men diuide Iesus separatyng his diuinitee from his humanitee Of whom sainct Ihon sayeth Whosoeuer diuideth Iesus is not of God but he is Antichrist And moreouer these men do so separate Christes body from his membres in the sacrament that they leaue hym no mans body at all For as Damascene saith that the distinction of membres pertayne so muche to the nature of a mannes body that where there is no suche distinction there is no perfecte mans body But by these Papistes doctrine there is no suche distinction of membres in the sacramente for eyther there is no head fete handes armes legges mouthe eyes and nose at all or elles all is heade all feete all handes all armes all legges all mouthe all eyes and all nose And so they make of Christes body no mannes bodye at all Thus beynge confuted the Papistes errours as well concernyng Transubstantiation as the reall corporall and natural presence of Christ in the sacrament whiche were two principall pointes purposed in the begynnyng of this woorke Nowe it is tyme som thyng to speke of the third errour of the Papistes whyche is concernynge the
a thing that we should knowe that the eatyng is our dwellyng in him and our drinkyng is as it were an incorporation in him beyng subiecte vnto him in obedience ioyned vnto him in our wylles and vnited in our affections The eatyng therefore of this fleshe is a certaine hunger and desire to dwell in him Thus wryteth Cyprian of the eatyng drynkyng of Christe And a lytle after he sayth that none do eate of this lambe but suche as be true Israelites that is to say pure christian menue without colour or dissimulacion And Athanasius speakinge of the eatinge of Christes fleshe and drinking of his bloud sayth that for this cause he made mention of his ascēcion into heauen to plucke them from corporall phantasie that thei might learne hereafter that his fleshe was called the celestiall meate that came from aboue and a spirituall foode which he would geue For those thinges that I speake to you saithe he be spirite and life Whiche is as muche to say as that thinge which you see shalbe slayne gyuen for the norishment of the worlde that it maye bee distributed to euerye body spiritually and be to all men a conseruacion vnto the resurrection of eternall lyfe In these woordes Athanasius declareth the cause why Christ made mention of his ascention into heauen whan hee spake of the eatinge and drinking of his fleshe and blud The cause after Athanasius mynde was thys that his hearers shuld not thinke of any carnal eating of his body with their mouths for as concerning the presence of his body he should be taken from them and ascende into heauen but that they shuld vnderstande him to be a spirituall meate and spiritually to be eaten and bi that refreshing to giue eternall lyfe which he doth to none but to suche as be his lyuely membres And of this eatinge speaketh also Basilius that we eate Christes flesh and drinke his blud beynge made by hys incarnation and sensyble lyfe partakers of his worde and wysedome For his fleshe and bludde he called all his mysticall conuersation here in his fleshe and his doctrine consistinge of his whole lyfe pertaininge bothe to his humanitie and diuinitye whereby the soule is norished and brought to the contemplacion of thinges eternall Thus teacheth Basilius howe we eate Christes flesh and drinke his blud which pertaineth only to the true and faithful membres of Christ. Saint hierome also saith All that loue pleasure more than god eate not the fleshe of Iesu nor drinke his bludde of the whiche himselfe saith He that eateth my fleshe and drinketh my blud hath euerlastynge lyfe And in an other place S. Hierome saith that heretiques do not eat and drynk the body and bludde of the Lorde And moreouer he saithe that heretiques eate not the fleshe of Iesu whose flesh is the meate of faythfull men Thus agreeth S. Hierome with the other before rehersed that heretiques and such as folow wordly pleasures eat not Christs flesh nor drink his blud bicause that Christ said He that eateth my flesh drinketh mi blud hath euerlastīg life And S. Ambrose saith that Iesus is y e bread which is the meat of Saintes and that he that taketh this breade dieth not a sinners deathe For this breade is the remission of sinnes And in an other booke to him intituled he writeth thus This breade of lyfe whiche came frome heauen doth minister euerlasting life and whosoeuer eateth this bread shall not dye for euer and is the bodye of Christe And yet in an other booke sette forth in his name he saith on this wise He that did eat Manna died but he that eateth this body shal haue remission of his synnes and shall not dye for euer And againe he saith As oftē as thou drinkest thou haste remission of thy sinnes These sentences of S. Ambrose be so playne in this matter that there needeth no more but only the rehersall of theim But S. Augustine in many places plainlye discussing this mattier saith He that agreeth not with Christe doeth neither eate his bodye nor drinke his bludde although to the condemnation of hys presumptiō he receiue euery day the sacramente of so highe a mattier And moreouer S. Augustine most plainly resolueth this matter in his booke De ciuitate Dei disputīg agaīst two kinds of heretiques Wherof the one said that as many as were christened and receaued the sacrament of Christs body and bludde shuld be saued howe so euer thei liued or beleued bicause that Christe saide This is the breade that came frō heauē that whosoeuer shal eate thereof shall not dye I am the bread of life which came from heauen whosoeuer shall eate of this breade shall lyue for euer Therfore said these heretiques all such men must needes be deliuered from eternall deathe and at length to be brought to eternall life The other said that heretiques and scismatiques myghte eate the sacrament of Chrystes bodye but not his verye body bicause they be no membres of his bodye And therfore they promised not euerlasting life to all that receaued Christes baptisme and the sacrament of his body but all suche as professed a true fayth althoughe they lyued neuer so vngodlye For suche sayde they doo eate the bodye of Christe not only in a sacrament but also in deede bicause they bee membres of Christes body But Saint Augustine aunsweringe to bothe these heresyes saith That neither heretiques nor such as professe a true fayth in their mouths in their lyuyng shew the contrary haue either a true faith which worketh by charity and doth none euel or are to be counted among the membres of Christ. For they cā not be both membres of Christ and membres of the diuell Therefore saith he it maye not be saide that any of theim eate the bodye of Christe For when Christe saythe he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bludde dwelleth in me and I in him he sheweth what it is not sacramentally but in deede to eate his bodye and drynke his bludde whiche is when a man dwelleth in Christe that Christ dwelleth in him For Christe spake those wordes as if he should say He that dwelleth not in me and in whom I dwell not lette him not saye or thinke that he eateth my body or drinketh my bloode These be the plaine wordes of S. Augustine that suche as liue vngodly although they may seme to eate Christes body because they eat the sacrament of his body yet in deede they neither bee membres of his body nor do eate his body Also vpon the gospel of sainct Ihon he sayth that he that doth not eate his fleshe and drynke his bloud hath not in him euerlastyng life And he that eateth his fleshe and drynketh his bloud hath euerlastyng life But it is not so in those meates whiche we take to sustayne our bodyes For although without them we can not liue yet it is not necessarye that whosoeuer receyueth them
shall liue for they may dye for age sickenes or other chaunces But in this meat and drynke of the body and bloud of our Lord it is otherwise For both thei that eate and drynke them not haue not euerlastyng life And contrary wyse whosoeuer eate and drynke them haue euerlastyng life Note and ponder well these wordes of sainct Augustyne that the bread and wyne and other meates and drynkes whiche norishe the body a man may eate neuerthelesse dye but the very body and bloud of Christ no mā eateth but that hath euerlastyng life So that wicked men can not eate nor drynke them for then they must nedes haue by them euerlastyng life And in thesame place sainct Augustyne sayth further The sacrament of the vnite of Christes body and bloud is taken in the Lordes table of some men to life of some men to death but the thyng it selfe wherof it is a sacrament is taken of all men to life and of no man to death And moreouer he sayth This is to eate that meate and drynke that drynke to dwell in Christ to haue Christ dwellyng in him And for that cause he that dwelleth in him And for that cause he that dwelleth not in Christe and in whom Christe dwelleth not without doubt he eateth not spiritually his fleshe nor drynketh his bloud although carnally and visibly with his teethe he byte the sacrament of his body and bloud Thus wryteth sainct Augustyne in the xxvi Homelie of sainct Ihon. And in the next homelie folowyng he sayth thus This day our sermon is of the body of the Lorde whiche he sayd he would geue to eate for eternal life And he declared the maner of his gift distribution howe he would geue his fleshe to eate saiyng He that eateth my fleshe drynketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him This therefore is a token or knowlege that a man hath eaten and dronken that is to say if he dwell in Christe and haue Christe dwellyng in him If he cleaue so to Christe that he is not seuered from him This therfore Christe taught admonished by these misticall or figuratiue Wordes that we should be in his body vnder him our head among his membres eatyng his fleshe not forsakyng his vnitee And in his boke De doctrina Christiana sainct Augustyne sayth as before is at length declared that to eate Christes flesh and to drynk his blud is a figuratiue speache signifiyng the participation of his passion the delectable remembrance to our benefite and profite that his fleshe was crucified and wounded for vs. And in another sermō also De verbis Apostoli he expoundeth what is the eatyng of Christes body the drinkyng of his bloud saiyng The eatyng is to be refreshed and the drinkyng what is it but to liue Eate life drinke life And that shall be when that whiche is taken visibly in the sacrament is in very deede eaten spiritually and drunken spiritually By all these sentences of S. Augustyne it is euident manifest that all men good and euil may with their mouthes visibly sensibly eate the sacrament of Christes body bloud but the very body and bloud them selues bee not eaten but spiritually that of the spirituall membres of Christ whiche dwell in Christ haue Christ dwellyng in them by whom they be refreshed haue euerlastyng life And therefore sayth sainct Augustyne that when thother Apostles did eate bread that was the Lorde yet Iudas did eate but the bread of the Lorde and not the bread that was the Lorde So that the other Apostles with the sacramentall bread did eate also Christ him selfe whō Iudas did not eate And a great numbre of places moe hath sainct Augustyne for this purpose whiche for eschewyng of tediousnes I let passe for this tyme wyll speake some thyng of sainct Cyrill Cyrill vpon sainct Ihon is Gospell sayth that those whiche eate Manna dyed because thei receyued thereby no strength to liue euer for it gaue no life but only put away bodely hunger but they that receyue the bread of lyfe shalbe made immortal and shall eschewe all the euils that partayne to death liuyng with Christ for euer And in another place he sayth Forasmuche as the fleshe of them to Christe doth naturally geue life therefore it maketh lyfe that bee partakers of it For it putteth death awaye from them and vtterly dryueth destruction out of them And he concludeth the matter shortly in another place in fewe woordes saiyng that when wee eate the fleshe of our sauiour then haue wee life in vs. For if thynges that were corrupt were restored by onely touchyng of his clothes howe can it bee that wee shall not liue that eate his fleshe And further he sayth that as two waxes that be molten together do rūne euery part into other so he that receyueth Christes fleshe and bloud must needes be ioyned so with him that Christ must be in him and he in Christ. Here sainct Cyrill declareth the dignitee of Christes fleshe beyng inseperately annexed vnto his diuinitee saiyng that it is of suche force and power that it geueth euerlastyng life And whatsoeuer occasion of death it fyndeth or let of eternal life it putteth out and dryueth cleane away all the same frō them that eate that meate and receiue that medicine Other medicines or plaisters somtyme heale and somtyme heal not but this medicine is of that effect and strength that it eateth awaye all rotten and deade fleshe and perfectely healeth all woundes and sores that it is laide vnto This is the dignitie and excellencie of Christes fleshe and bloode ioyned to his diuinitie of the whyche dignytie Christes aduersaries the Papistes depriue and robbe him when they affirme that suche men do eate his fleshe receiue this plaister as remaine styll sicke and sore and be not holpen thereby And now for corroboration of Cyrils saying I would thus reason with the Papistes and demaunde of them When an vnrepentant synner receiueth the sacrament whether he haue Christes body within him or no If they saye no than haue I my purpose that euel men although they receaue the sacramente of Christes body yet receiue they not his verye body Yf they saye yea Then I wolde aske them further Whether they haue Christs spirit with in them or no If they say nay then do they separate Christs body from his spirite and his humanitye frome his diuinite and be condemned by the scripture as very Antichristes that diuide Christe And yf they say yea that a wicked man hathe Christes spirit in him then the scripture also cōdemneth them saying that as he which hath no spirite of Christes is none of his so he that hathe Christe in him lyueth because he is iustified And yf his spirite that raised Iesus from death dwell in you he that raised Christe from death shall gyue lyfe to your mortall bodyes for his spirits sake whiche dwelleth in you Thus on
Lyon a byrdes image a byrde and an image of a tree and herbe is called a tree or herbe So were we wont to say Our lady of Walsyngham Our lady of Ipiswyche Oure lady of Grace Our lady of pytie sainct Peter of Myllan Sainct Ihon of Amyas and suche like not meanyng the thynges them selues but callyng their images by the name of the thynges by them prepresēted And lykewise we were wont to say Great sainct Christopher of Yorke or Lyncolne Oure lady smyleth or rocketh her childe Let vs go in Pilgrymage to sainct Peter at Rome and sainct Iames in Compostella And a thousand lyke speeches whiche were not vnderstand of the very thinges but onely of the images of them So doth sainct Ihon Chrysostome say that wee see Christ with oure eyes touche him feele him and grope him with our handes fixe oure teethe in his fleshe taste it breake it eate it and digest it make redde our tongues and dye them with his bloud and swalowe it and drynke it And in a Cathechisme by me translated set furth I vsed like maner of speeche saiyng that with our bodely mouthes we receiue the body bloud of Christ. Whiche my saiyng diuers ignorant persones not vsed to reade olde auncient authors nor acquainted with their phrase and maner of speeche did carpe and reprehende for lacke of good vnderstandyng For this speeche and other before rehersed of Chrysostome all other like he not vnderstand of the very fleshe and bloud of our sauior Christ whiche in very deede wee neither feele nor see but that whiche wee do to the bread and wyne by a figuratiue speeche is spoken to bee done to the fleshe bloud because they bee the very signes figures and tokens instituted of Christ to represent vnto vs his very fleshe and bloud And yet as with our corporal eyes corporal hādes and mouthes wee do corporally see feele taste and eate the bread and drynke the wyne beyng the signe and sacramentes of Christes body euen so with oure spiritual eyes handes and mouthes we do spiritually see feele taste eate his very fleshe and drynke his very bloud As Eusebius Emissenus sayth Whan thou commest to the reuerend altare to be fylled with spiritual meates with thy fayth looke vpon the body bloud of him that is thy god honor him touche him with thy mynde take him with the hād of thy heart drynke him with the draught of thyne inwarde man And these spiritual thinges requyre no corporall presence of Christ him selfe who sytteth continually in heauen at the right hand of his father And as this is most true so is it ful and sufficient to answere all thynges that the Papistes can bryng in this matter that hath any apparance for their partie Nowe it is requisite to speake some thyng of the maner and forme of worshippyng of Christ by them that receiue this sacrament lest that in the steade of Christ him selfe be worshipped the sacrament For as his humanitee ioyned to his diuinitee and exalted to the right hande of his father is to be worshipped of all creatures in heauen yearth and vnder the yearth 〈◊〉 if in the steade thereof we worshyp the signes and sacramentes we committee as greate Idolatrye as euer was or shall be to the worldes ende And yet haue the very Antichristes the subtilest enemies that Christe hath by their fyne inuentions and crafty scholastical diuinitee deluded many simple soules and broughte theym to this horrible Idolatry to worshyp thynges visible and made with their owne handes persuadyng them that creatures were theyr creatour theyr God and theyr maker For els what made the people to runne frome theyr seates to the altar from aultar to aultar and frō sakeryng as they called it to sakeryng peepyng tootyng and gasynge at the thynge whiche the priest helde vp in his handes if they thought not to honour that thyng whiche they sawe What moued the priestes to lyft vp the sacrament to hye ouer their beades or the people to crie to the prieste holde vp holde vp and one man to saie to an other stoupe downe before or to saie This daie I haue sene my maker And I can not be quiet excepte I see my maker ones a daie What was the cause of al these and that as well the priest as the people so deuoutely dyd knocke and kneele at euery syghte of the sacrament but that they woorshypped that vysyble thynge whyche they sawe with theyr eyes and tooke it for very God For yf they worshypped in spirite onely Christe syttynge in heauen with his father what needed they to remoue oute of theyr seates to toote and gaase as the apostles dyd after Christe whan he was gone vp into heauen If thei worshypped nothyng that they sawe why dyd they ryse vp to see Doubtles many of the simple people woorshipped that thyng which they sawe with their eies And although the subtyl Papistes doo colour and cloke the matter neuer so finely sayeng that they worshyp not the sacramentes whiche they see with theyr eyes but that thyng whyche they beleue with their faith to be really and corporally in the sacramentes yet why doo they than run frō place to place to gase at the thinges whiche they see yf they worshyp them not giuyng therby occasion to them that be ignorant to worship that whyche they see Why doo they not rather quietly syt styll in their seates and moue the people to doo the lyke woorshyppynge God in hart and in spirite than to gadde aboute from place to place to see that thyng whyche they confesse theim selues is not to bee worshipped And yet to eschue one inconuenience that is to saie the worshyppyng of the sacrament they fall into an other as euyl and worshyp ▪ nothyng there at al. For they worship that thyng as thei say whiche is really and corporally and yet inuisibly present vnder the kinds of bread and wine whiche as before is expressed and proued is vtterly nothyng And so they geue vnto the ignorant occasion to worshyp breade and wyne and they them selues worshyp nothynge there at all But the Papistes for their owne commoditee to kepe the people styll in Idolatrye do often allege a certain place of S. Augustyne vpō the Psalmes where he sayth that no man dothe eate the fleshe of Christe excepte he fyrste worship it and that we do not offende in worshippyng therof but we should offende if we should not worship it That is true whiche sainct Augustyne sayt◠in this place For who is hee that professeth Christe and is spiritually fedde and nourished with his fleshe and bloud but he wyll honour and worship him sittyng at the right hande of his father and tendre vnto him frō the bottome of his heart all laude prayse and thankes for his mercyfull redemption AND as this is moste true whiche sainct Augustyne sayth so is that moste false whiche the Papistes would persuade vpon sainct Augustynes woordes that
the sacramentall bread and wyne or any vysyble thynge is to bee woorshypped in the Sacrament For sainct Augustynes mynde was so farre from any suche thought that hee forbyddeth vtterly to woorship Christes owne fleshe and bloud alone but in consideracion and as they bee annexed and ioyned to his diuinitee Howe muche lesse than could he thynke or allowe that we should worshyp the sacramentall bread and wyne or any outwarde or visible sacrament whiche bee shadowes figures and representacions of Christes very fleshe and bloudde And saynt Augustin was afrayde lest in worshyppyng of Christes very body we shoulde offende and therfore he byddeth vs whan we worshyp Christe that we shoulde not tarry and fixe our myndes vpon his fleshe whyche of it self auayleth nothyng but that we shuld lyfte vp but our myndes from the fleshe to the spirite whiche giueth lyfe and yet the Papistes be not afrayde by crafty meanes to induce vs to worship those thynges whyche be signes and sacramentes of Christes bodye But what wyl not the shamelesse Papistes alledge for theyr purpose whan they be not ashamed to maynteyne the adoration of the Sacrament by these wordes of saynt Augustins wherin he Speaketh not one word of the adoration of the sacrament but onely of Christe hym selfe And although he saie that Christe gaue his fleshe to be eaten of vs yet he ment not that his fleshe is here corporally presente and corporally eaten but onely spiritually As his wordes declare playnly whyche folowe in the same place where saynt Augustine as it were in the persone of Christe speaketh these wordes It is the spirite that geueth lyfe but the fleshe profiteth nothynge The wordes whiche I haue spoken vnto you be spirite and lyfe That whiche I haue spoken vnderstande you spiritually You shall not eate this body which you se and drynke that blud whyche they shall shedde that shall crucifie me I haue commended vnto you a sacramente vnderstande it spiritually and it shall geue you lyfe And although it must bee visibly minystred yet it muste be inuisibly vnderstande These wordes of sayncte Augustine with the other before recited do expresse his mynd playnlye that Christe is not otherwyse to bee eaten than spiritually whyche spirituall eatynge requyreth no corporall presence and that he intended not to teache heere any adoration eyther of the visible sacramentes or of any thyng that is corporally in them For in dede there is nothyng really and corporally in the bread to be worshipped although the Papistes say that Christe is in euery consecrated breade But our Sauiour Christe hym selfe hath geuen vs warnyng before hande that suche false christians and false teachers shoulde come and hath bydde vs to beware of them sayeng If any man telle you that Christe is here or Christe is there beleue hym not For there shall ryse false Christes and false prophetes and shall shew many signes and wonders so that if it were possyble the verye electe shoulde bee broughte into erroure Take heede I haue tolde you before hande Thus our Sauiour Christe lyke a moste louynge pastour and sauioure of our soules hath gyuen vs warnyng before hande of the perylles and daungers that were to come and to bee wise and ware that we shoulde not geue credite vnto suche teachers as woulde perswade vs to worshyppe a peece of breade to kneele to it to knocke to it to creepe to it to folowe it in Procession to lyfte vp our handes to it to offer to it to lyght candels to it to shut it vp in a cheste or boxe to dooe all other honoure vnto it more than we dooe vnto God hauynge alwaye this pretence or excuse for our Idolatrie Beholde here is Christe But oure sauiour Christe calleth theym false Prophetes and saieth Take heede I tell you before Beleue theym not If they saie to you Beholde Christe is abrode or in the wyldernesse go not out And if they say that he is kepte in close places beleue them not And yf you wyll aske me the question who be those false Prophetes and seducers of the people the aunswere is soone made The Romishe Antichristes and theyr adherentes the authors of all errour ignorance blyndenesse superstition hypocrisie and ydolatrie For Innocentius the thyrd one of the moste wycked men that euer was in the sea of Rome dyd ordeyne and decree that the hoste should be diligently kept vnder locke and keye And Honorius the thirde not only confirmed the same but commanded also that the priestes shulde diligently teache the people from tyme to tyme that whan they lyfted vp the breadde called the hoste the people should then reuerently bowe downe and that lykewyse they shoulde do whan the prieste carrieth the hoste vnto sycke folkes These be the statutes and ordynances of Rome vnder pretence of holynesse to leade the people vnto all errour and Idolatrie not bryngynge theym by breadde vnto Christe but from Christe vnto bread But all that loue and beleeue Christe hym selfe lette theym not thynke that Christe is corporally in the breadde but lette theym lyfte vp theyr hartes vnto heauen and woorshyp hym syttyng there at the ryght hande of his Father Lette theym worshyp hym in them selues whose temples they bee in whome hee dwelleth and lyueth spiritually but in no wyse let them worshyp hym as beynge corporally in the breadde For he is not in it neyther spiritually as he is in manne nor corporally as hee is in heauen but onely sacramentally as a thynge maye bee sayde to bee in the fygure whereby it is sygnyfyed Thus is sufficientely reproued the thyrde pryncipall errour of the Papistes concernynge the Lordes supper whyche is That wycked membres of the deuyl do eate Christes very bodye and drynke his bloude Thus endeth the fowerth booke THE FIFTH BOKE IS OF THE OBLATION AND SACRIfice of our Sauiour Christe The greatest blasphemye iniury that can be against Christe yet uniuersally vsed through the Popishe kyngdom is this that the priestes make their Masse a sacrifice propitiatory to remit the synnes aswell of theim selues as of other both quicke and dead to whō they list to apply the same Thus vnder pretence of holynes the Papistical priestes haue taken vpon them to be Christes successours and to make suche an oblacion and sacrifice as neuer creature made but Christe alone neither he made the same any mo tymes than ones and that was by his death vpon the crosse For as sainct Paule in his Epistle to the Hebrues witnesseth Although the high priestes of the olde lawe offered many tymes at the least euery yere ones yet Christe offereth not him selfe many tymes for then he should many tymes haue dyed But nowe he offereth him selfe but ones to take awaye synne by that offeryng of him selfe And as menne must dye ones so was Christ offered ones to take awaye the synnes of many And furthermore S. Paule sayth That the sacrifices of the olde lawe although they were contynually offered
59 1 4 Christ called not bread his body 72 2 16 This baptisme and washynge by the fyre the holy goste this newe byrthe this water that spryngeth in a man and floweth into euerlastyng lyfe and this clothyng and buryall can not be vnderstande of any materiall baptisme materyall washyng â–ª material byrth clothing and burial but by translatioÌ„ of â–ª c. 96 2 8 For asmuche as the fleshe of Christe dothe naturally geue lyfe therfore it maketh them to lyue â–ª c. 97 â— 30 That as he whiche hathe not the spirite â–ª c All other faultes may bee easyly corrected A TABLE OF THE CHIEF AND PRINCIPALL MATTERS CONteyned in this Booke The contentes of the first booke THe abuse of the Lordes supper Fol. 1. The eatyng of the body of Christ. Eodem The eatyng of the sacrament of his body fol. 2. Christ calleth the material bread his body fol. 4. Euil men do eat y e sacrameÌ„t but not the body of Christ. fo 5. Thynges sufficente for a christen mans faythe concernyng this sacrament Eodem The sacrament which was ordeined to make loue concord is tourned into the occasion of variance and discord fo 6. The spirituall hunger and thirstynesse of the soule fol. eod The spirituall foode of the soule fol. 8. Christ farre excelleth all corporal foode fol. 9. The sacrameÌ„tes were ordayned to confirme our fayth eodeÌ„ Wherfore this sacrameÌ„t was ordayned in bread and wyne fol. 11. The vnitee of Christes mistical body Eodem This sacrament moueth all men to loue frendship fol. 12. The doctrine of transubstantiation doth cleane subuert our fayth in Christ. Eodem The spiritual eatyng is with the heart not with the teethe fol. 13. Foure principal errors of the Papistes fol. 14. The first is of transubstantiation fol. eod The second is of the presence of Christ in this sacrament fol. 15. The third is that euil menne eate and drynke the very body and bloud of Christ fol. 17. The fourth is of the dayly sacrifice of Christ fol. eod The contentes of the second booke The confutation of the error of TraÌ„substantiation fol. 17. The Papistical doctrine is contrary to Gods worde EodeÌ„ The Papistical doctrine is against reason fol. 20. The Papistical doctrine is also against our senses fol. 21. The Papistical doctrine is contraye to the fayth of the olde authors of Christes Churche fol. 23. Transubstantiation came from Rome fol. 29. The first reason of the Papistes to proue their Transubstantiation with the answere therto fol. 31. The seconde argumente for Transubstantiation with the aunswere fol. 33. The thirdâ— argument with the answere fol. 34. Authours wrested of the Papystes for theyr transubstantiation fol. 34. Negatives by comparison fol. 36. Absurditees that folowe of transubstantiation fol. 43. The contentes of the thirde booke ¶ The presence of Christe in the sacrament fol. 45. Christe corporally is ascended into heauen fol. â—od The difference betwene the trewe and the Papisticall doctrine concernyng the presence of Christes body fol. 46. The profe wherof by our professioÌ„ in our coÌ„mon crede fo 48 An other profe by the holy scripture fo 49 Also an other profe by auncient authours fol. eodem One body can not be in dyuers places at one tyme fol. 52. An answere to the Papistes alledgyng for them these wordes This is my body fol. 56. The argumente of the Papystes fol. eod The interpretation of these wordes This is my body fol. eod Christ called bread his body wine his bloud fo 57. Bread is my body wyne is my bloudde bee figuratiue speeches fol. 59. To eate Christes fleshe and drynke his bloud be figuratiue speeches folâ— eod This is my body This is my bloudde bee figuratiue speeches fol. 62. The breade representeth Christes bodye and the wyne his bloude fol. eod Signes and fygures haue the names of the thynges whyche they sygnifie fo 64. Fiue principall thinges to be noted in Theodoretus fo 70. Figuratiue speeches bee not straunge fo 71. Christe hym selfe vsed figuratiue speeches fol. eodem The Paschall Lambe folio 72. The Lordes Supper folio eodem What figuratiue speeches were vsed at Christes laste supper folio 73. Aunswere to the auctoritees and argumentes of the Papystes folio 74. One brefe aunswere to all fol. eod The aunsweres to all the doctours folio 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87. The contentes of the fourth boke Whether euill men do eate and drynke Christe fol. 90. The godly onely eate Christ Eodem What is the eatyng of Christes fleshe and drinkyng of his bloud fol. 91. Christ is not eaten with teethe but with fayth Eodem The good only eate Christe fol. 92. The aunswere to the Papystes that doo affyrme that the euyll doo eate Christes body c. fo 97. The aunswere to the Papystes authors whyche at the fyrste shewe seeme to make for theym foli 98. Figures be called by the names of the thynges whiche they sygnifie fol. 99. The adoration of the sacrament folio 101. The simple people be deceyued Eodem They be the Papistes that haue deceiued the people fol. 103. An exhortation to the true honoryng of Christ in the sacrament foli 104. The contentes of the fift booke ¶ The sacrifice of the masse fol. 104. The difference betweene the sacrifice of Christe and of the priestes of the olde lawe folio eodem Two kyndes of sacrifices fol. 106. The sacrifice of Christe folio eodem A more playne declaration of the sacrifice of Christ. fo eod The sacrifices of the olde lawe fol. 107. The masse is not a sacrifice propiciatorye fol. 108. A confutation of the papistes cauillation fol. 109 The true sacrifice of all christen people Eodem The Popishe Masse is detestable Idolatry vtterly to be banished from all christen congregations fol. 110. Euery manne ought to receiue the sacrament himselfe and not one for another fol. 111. The difference betwene the priest the lay man Eodem The answere to the Papistes concernyng the sacrifice propiciatorie fol. 112. An aunswere to the authors fol. eodem The lay persons make a sacrifice aswel as the priest fol. 114 The Papistical Masse is neither a sacrifice propitiatorye nor of thankes geuyng Eodem There was no Papistical Masses in the primatiue churche Eodem The causes and meanes howe Papisticall Masses entered into the Churche fol. 115 The abuses of the Papisticall Masses fo eod What Churche is to bee folowed fo 116. A shorte instruction to the holy communyon fol. eod Here endeth the Table IMPRINTED at London in Poules churcheyarde at the signe of the Brasen serpent by Reynold Wolfe Cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solum ANNO DOMINI M.D.L. Math â–ª 15 â–ª The eatyng of the body of Christ. Ihon. 6. Augustin in Ioan Tractat 26. Eodent tract Aug. de Ciuitate Lib. 21. cap. 25. Chap. 3. The eting of the sacramente of his bodye Math. 26 Matâ— 14 Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 10. 1. Cor. 11. Chap. 4. Christ called the materiall breade his
body 1. Cor. 10. 1. Cor. 11. Chap. 5. Euill men do eate the sacrament but not the bodye of Christe Iohn 6. 1. Cor. 11 â— Corin. 11. Chap. 6. These thiÌ„ges suffice for a christen mans faith concerninge this sacrament Chap. 7. The sacrament whiche was ordained to make loue and concord is turned into the occasioÌ„ of variaÌ„ce and discord Chap. 8. Chap. 9. The spirituall hunger thirstinesse of the soule Ephe. 2. Rom. 3. Psal 41 Ps. 62. Rom. 4. Roma 7. Rom. 8. Math. 5. Luc. 1. Iohn 4. Iho. 4. Iohn 6. Cha. 10. The spiritual foode of the soul Math. 11. Iohn 7. Ioh. 6. Iho. 6. Iohn 6. Gal. 2. Chap 11. Christâ— far excelleth all corporall foode Ioh. 11. Cha. 12. The sacrameÌ„ts wer ordeyned to coÌ„firme our faithe Chap. 13. Wherfore this sacrament was ordeyned in breead and wyne Chap. 14 The vnite of Christs mysticall body â— Co. 10. Dionysius Chap. 15 This Sacramente moueth al meÌ„ to loue and frendshyp The doctrine of traÌ„substaÌ„tiation doeth cleane subuerte our faythe in Christe Chap. 16. The spiritual etyng is with â—he harte not with the teethe Iohn 6. Luce. 22 1 Cor. 11. Luce. 22 Chap. 17 Four principall errors of the Papistes The fyrste is of transubstantiation De summa trini et fide catholica The secoÌ„d is of the preseÌ„ce of Christ in this sacrament De consecrati Distin. 2. Ego Beringarius Ioan. 6. Mat. 26 Mat. 24 Act. 3. Colos. 3 1. Cor. 11 The thyrd is that euil men eate drinke the very bodye and bloode of Christ. Aâ—acult 2. Chap. 1. The conâ—utacion of the erroure of transubstantiatioÌ„ Chap. 2. The papisticall doctrine is coÌ„trarye to Goddes worde Math. 26. Mark 14. Luce. 22. â— Cor. 10. Mat. 26 Mat. 26. Mat. 14 Luc. 22. Mat. 26. Mar. 14. 1. Co. 10 1. Co. 10 Chap. 3. The Papistical doctrin is against reason Chap. 4 The papisticall doctrine is also agaynst all our senses Ioh. 20. Chap. 5. The papysticall doctrine is coÌ„trary to y e faythe of the old authours of Christes Churche Iustinus Irenaeus contra Valentiâ—â—um lib. 1. cap. 4. Origenes in Mat. ca. 15. Cyprian ad CeciliuÌ„ li. 2. epistola 3. Mat. 26. Eusebius Emissenus De conseâ—r Distinction 2. Hilarius Epiphanius contra haere ses lib â–ª 3. to 2. Et in Anacephaleosi Chrysosto in Mat. cap. 26. hom 83 Ad CesariuÌ„ monachum Ambrosius De ijs qui mysterijs iniciantur Ca. â—lti De sacramentis li. 4. cap. 4. Augustinus in sermone ad infaÌ„tes In lib. sententiarun Prosperi Chrysosto ad Cesarium monachum Gelaâ—ius coÌ„tra EuticheÌ„ et NestoriuÌ„ Theodoretus in dialogis Chap. 6. Transubstantâ—atioÌ„â—ame from Rome Scotus sup 4. seâ— di 12 Grabriel Chap. 7. Chap. 8. The first reason of y e Papistes to proue their transubstaÌ„tiation Math. 26 Mar. 14. Luc. 22. The answere The answere more directly Chap. 9. The secoÌ„d argument for traÌ„substantiation The aunswere Math. 3. Mark 1. Luce 3 Chap. 10. The thyrd reason Iohn 6. The aunswere Iohn 6. Iohn 6. Chap. 11. Authores wrested of the Papistes for their transubstantiaion Cyprianus De coena domini The aunswere Chap. 12 Chrysostomus The answere Negatiues by comparison 1. Reg. 8. Psal. 21. Rom. 7 1. Cor. 1. 1. Cor. 1. 1. Cor. 3. Gal. 2. Gal. 6. Ephe. 6. 1. Cor. 1. Rom. 15. 2. Cor. 11. 2. Cor. 11. 12. Gal â–ª 5. 1. Pet. 3. Mat. 6. Mat. 10 Mat. 10 Mat. 23 Mat. 23 Mat. 10. Mat. 10 Mat. 20 Ioh. 4. Ioan. 5. Ioan. 7 Iohn 8. Iho. 6. Gal. 3. Chrysostomus Chap. 13. Ambros. de ijs qui mysterijs initiantur Exo. 7. Exo. 7. Exo. 14 Exo. 17. Exod. 15. 4. Reg. 6 Ps. 148. The aunswere Lis. 4. De sâ—â—ramentis cap. 4. Chap. 14 Absurditees that folowe of TransubstaÌ„tiation Chap. 1. The presence of Christe in y e sacrameÌ„t Christ corporally ys ascended into heaueÌ„ Act. 1 3. Chap. 2. The difference betwene the true the papisticall doctrine coÌ„cerâ—ing the preseÌ„ce of Christs bâ—by Chap. 3. The profe hereof by our profession in our common Crede Chap. 4. The profe hereof by the scipture Ioh. 16. †Mat. 26. Mat. 24. Mar. vlt. Colos. 3. Hebre. 8. Hebre. 10. Chap. 5. The profe thereof by aunciente authors Origen in Mat. tracta 33. August ad Dardanum epist. 57. In Ioan. tracta 39. Tract 50. De essentia diuinitatis Cyrillus in Ihon. lib. 6. ca. 14. Libro 9. cap. 21. Ambrosius in Lucam li. 10. ca. 24 Gregorius in Ho. paschatis Chap. 6. One bodye can not be in dyuers places at one tyme. Ad Dardanum Cyrillus de Trin. lib. 2. Didymus de spiritu saÌ„cto lib. 1 cap. 1. Basilius de spiritu sancto ca. 22. Fulgentius ad TrasimuÌ„ dum Regem lib. 2. Vigilius Contra Eutychen libro 1. Ioh. 14 Ioh. 16. Act. 1â— Mat. vlâ— Contra Euâ—ycheÌ„ lib. 4 Chap. 7. An answer to the Papistes alledgynge for theym theâ—e wordes This is my bodye The argumente of the Papistes The aunswere The interpretation of these woordes This is my body Chap. 8. Christ called breade his body and wyne his bloud Irenaeus contra Valent. lib. 4. ca. 32 Cap. 34. Cap. 57. Lib. 5. Tertulianus aduersus Iudaeos Cyprianus ad MagnuÌ„â—â— 1. epi. 6. Lib. 2. Epist 3. Epiâ—phan in Ancorato Hieron ad Hedibiam Augusti de trinita li. 3. cap. 4. De verbis a pâ—stoli sermo 2. Cyrillus in Ioannem li. 4. ca. 14. Theodoretus dialogo 1. Chap. 9. Breade is my body wyne is my bloud be figuratiue speeches Chap. 10 To eate Chrystes fleshe and drynk his bloud bee figuratiue speeches Ioh. 6. 1 Cor. 10 1. Cor. 10. Origen in Leuit. ho. 7 Chrisostom in Ioannem Hom. 26. Augâ—stinus de dâ—ctrina christ lib 3. Iohn 6. De catecâ— rudib ca. Contra aduers legis Propheâ— cap. 9. Chap. 11. This is my bodye this is my bloodde be figuratiue speaches The bread represeÌ„teth Christes body the wyne hys bloode Tertulia nus coÌ„tra MartioneÌ„ Librâ— 1 Cyprianus libr. 2 Epist. 3 De vnctioÌ„e Chrismatis Chrysosto in Psal. 22. Hieronym in Math. 26. Ambros. de hijs qui mysterijs initiantur cap. vlt. De sacramentis li. 6. ca. 4 Lib. 4. cap. 4. Lib. 4. cap. 5. 1. Co. 11 Signes figures haue the names of the thiÌ„ges which thei signifie August ad Bonifatium Episto 23. Suâ—er Leui. quest 57. Leui. 17. Be. 41. â— Cor. 2. CoÌ„tra AdamantiuÌ„ cap. 12. Leui. 17 Math. 26 Contra MaximinuÌ„ li. 3 cap. 22. In lib. senteÌ„tiarum Prosperi de coÌ„scrat distin 4. hoc est Theodoret in dialogis In y e firste Dialoge Iohn 12 Mat. 26. Mat. 14 Luc. 22 Ihon. 15. Ihon. 12. Ihon. 15. Mat. 26. Gen. 46. Iho. 6. Dialo 2. Act. 17. Act. 1. Mat. 24. Fiue principall thinges to bee noted in Theodoretus Chap. 12 Figuratiue speeches bee not straÌ„ge â— Reg. 4. 2. Reg. 7. Christe him self vsed figuratiue speeches Math. 13. †Mat. 11. and. 17. * Iohn 16 †Iohn 6. * Iohn 15 Math. 3.2 †Iohn