seconde P. Touching his humane nature M. And the thirde P. Concerning the vnion of the two natures Of the faith of the Christians concerning the diuine and humane natures of Iesus Christe M. WHat must we beléeue of his diuine nature P. That he is very God without beginning and withoute ende of one essence with the father and that he is his eternall word wisedome M. And cōcerning his humane nature P. That he is very man hauing a very mans bodie of our fleshe of oure blend bones a very humane soule as other mē haue and that he was made in euery point like vnto vs sinne excepted Hovv the diuine and humaine natures vvhich are in the person of Iesus Christ do not make two Iesus Christs but one only M. WHat canst thou yet say of the vnion of these two natures beside that whiche thou hast alredy spoken when thou handledst the office of mediatoure of Iesus Christe P. It is that they be so vnited togither that they remayne alwayes in their very naturall in one very person M. What meanest thou thereby P. That being so vnited they make vs not two Iesus Christes to witte the one God and the other man but one only whiche is very God and very man togither in one onely person euen as the body and soule of man make one onely mā and one only person and not twaine M. This vnion of these two natures thē is very necessarie to oure saluation P. Thou maist well know that as well by that which we haue alredy sayd touching this matter as by the office whiche was assigned vnto Iesus Christ by his father For there is no one Iesus Christ whiche being but only God coulde haue saued man nor coulde haue dyed for them and an other being but only man might dye for them but coulde not haue power to saue them nor to beare the iudgement of God for their sinnes VVhether the diuine nature be in Iesus Christ in stead of the soule or else that he hath a very humane soule M. DOest thou meane by this that the diuine nature of Iesus Christe is in stead of a soule to the humaine nature P. If the diuine nature were in stead of a soule to the humane nature and that Iesus Christe had no very humane soule he should be no true and perfect man. M. For what cause P. Bicause that the principall parte of man whiche is the soule shuld be wanting in him for this cause I haue saide heretofore that Iesus Christ was very man compounded of a very humane body and a very humane soule How the eternall worde of God became fleslie M. THou hast saide heretofore that Iesus Christ was the eternall worde of God. Now Sainct Iohn saith that that worde whiche is very God eternall became flesh Pe. What meanest thou by that Doest thou thinke that the same worde of God was conuerted into fleshe in suche sorte that it was no more the eternall worde of God but fleshe and that the Sonne of God which is that word of God being God before that time did so become man that he is no more God but man only M. Thou hast giuen me well to vnderstande by that whiche thou hast euen now said of the diuinitie and humanitie of Iesus Christ that we may not so thinke of him but bycause Saincte Iohn maketh mention but of the flesh when he saith that that word became flesh a man might thinke that he spake but of the body and not at al of the soule but that this worde of God vnited with the body was to it in stead of a soule P. If Sainct Iohn had mente so he wold rather haue said as it is elsewhere said in the holy scripturs that Iesus Christe had taken the séede of Abraham to witte our flesh and not the Angells M. Why is it then that he maketh mention but of the flesh seing that it is the least and most vile parte of man P. I can yeld vnto thee chiefly two reasons M. Which is the first P. It is bycause the holy Scriptures do take oft times a part for the whole And therefore it taketh now the flesh now the soule for the whole man complete M. Which is the seconde reason P. It is that when the holy Scripture doth vse the name of fleshe to signifie the whole man she vseth that manner of speach to admonish men of the infirmities that are in them to the end they may vnderstande that they are but men mortall and not Gods immortall M. Hath Sainct Iohn had regarde therevnto whē he said that the Sonne of God was made fleshe P. There is no doubt of it But it is in an other regarde For albeit that Iesus were very god as touching hys diuine nature that he toke our flesh without any spot of sinne when he was made mā that he hath vnited his diuine nature with the humane nature yet for al that he was so exempte frō all sin that notwithstāding he wold be subiect without sinne to al the infirmities and miseries wherevnto men are subiecte bycause of theyr sinnes M. Thou meanest then that thys worde of flesh emporteth all that same and that it doth better expresse in what manner and to what condition and ende the sonne of God did take our nature to him and was made man than if he had spoken otherwise P. It is euen so and therefore he doth also call himselfe so oftentimes the sonne of man to giue vs to vnderstande that he is not only a very naturall man descended of the race of Adam of the which al others are descended but also that he made himselfe subiecte to all the miseries and necessities of man whervnto men are subiect always excepted any spotte of sinne Of the conception of Iesus Christ and of the nature of his fleshe M. NOwe séeing that that humayne flesh which Iesus Christ hath taken for vs is exempte from all sinne where is then that he toke it Did he bring it from Heauen with hym or else did he take it vppon the Earthe P. When thou confessest that hée was conceiued of the holy Ghost and borne of the virgine Mary thou confessest that he toke it vppon earth in the wombe of that holye virgin M. But coulde he not haue passed thorow the womb of the virgin with a heauenly fleshe withoute taking any thing of hir fleshe P. If he had brought from heauen that flesh which he hath and that it were a flesh of a heauenly and diuine nature which he should not haue taken in the wombe of the virgin and of the proper fleshe and bloud of hir we could not say truly that she had conceyued and borne him and consequently that he were very man of oure proper fleshe and bloud whiche we haue of oure first father Adam VVherevnto the genealogie of Iesus Christe according to the fleshe dothe serue vs. M. I Thinke S. Mathew and S. Luke woulde giue vs to vnderstande
therfore man shall leaue father and mother and shall sticke to his wyfe If ther be great difference betwene the nature of the man and of the woman and that of other liuing creatures cōcerning the very bodie the difference is yet much more greate concerning the soule forsomuche as the other lyuing creatures were not created to the image and lykelynesse of God as man was wherefore they haue not a soule of a heauenly and diuine nature as he hath P. Thou séest then alredy here the vnion and communion of Nature that man and woman haue togither as well of body as of soule and the difference that is betwene them and all other liuing creatures in all these two pointes M. I do nowe vnderstande well this vnion and communion of nature whiche is betwene man and woman withoute the whiche they coulde not be allied togither by marriage as man and wife P. Thou oughtest in like sorte to vnderstande that we maye haue also no communicatoin with Iesus Christe if we haue not first the same communion of nature with him whereby he was made man lyke vnto vs as touching the nature and substance of the flesh M. I haue well vnderstood that which thou hast alredy sayde to that purpose concerning the communion of nature the whiche he hath of nature with vs and not at all with the Angells Of an other more speciall vniō and coniunction which is proper to marriage vvhich is betvvene Iesus Christ and his Churche M. NOw it is not inough to be vnited ioyned togither by mariage to be of one very humane nature that the one be masle the other femasle but it is also requisite that there be a more neare and a more speciall vnion and coniunction M What is that other coniunction P. It is a coniunction which is made by aliance by the whiche the man and the woman that are vnited ioyned togither by the same haue a speciall communion betwene thē the which the husbande hath not with other women nor the woman with other men M. I do wel vnderstand that ther is no suche coniunction and communion of body and goods and of al things among al other men and women that are not married togither as ther is betwene the man and the wife by the alliance and coniunction of marriage that is betwene them P. It is very true For this vnion and cōmunion is suche that the husbande hathe not power of his owne body but the wife as also the wife hath not power of hirs but the husband M. If there be such communion and coniunction of body there is no doubte but it is also of all good euill that may happē vnto thē togither P. It is euē so by the special cōmuniō which Iesus Christ hath with the faithful that the faithfull haue with hym by the power of the holy ghost which ioyneth thē with him by true lyuing faith M. Thou meanest then that there is so great differēce betwene the cōmuniō that is betwéen Iesus christ the faithful in respect of the vnfaithful as is betwen that which is betwene the mā the wife in respect of other mē womē P. It is euen so For the only cōmuniō of nature maketh not cōmuniō of body goodes betwene al men and women as doth the coniunction of marriage the whiche the husband the wife haue togither M. Thou wilt thē say in like sorte that the communion of nature the which Iesus Christ hath commō with all mē doth not carie with it such communiō of al things as doth that which he hath special with the faithful by means of the faith which thei haue in him P. the vnbeleuers haue nothing cōmō with Iesus christ but that thei ar mē of the same human nature but the faithfull haue this more which is the principall that all that they haue is common to Iesus Christ with them and that whiche Iesus Christe hath is common to them also M. What is it that Iesus Christe may take of them forsomuch as they be all none other than poore and sinfull men P. He taketh vppon him their sinnes and the paine whiche is due vnto them as though he himselfe had committed them and that he were guiltie to discharge and delyuer them M. He taketh then nothing of vs but onely the euill whiche is in vs P. What other thyng may he take séeing that there is none other thing in vs But the nature of the alliance and communion which we haue with him thorough faith bringeth it for otherwise ther should be no perfect communion and so the alliance shoulde not be full if there were no participation of good and euill suche as it shoulde and oughte to be among those whiche be allyed M. Then on the contrary it muste be following the nature of this communion and alliance that wée receiue of Iesus Christe the good things which are in him as he doth the euill that is in vs P. It is so to be vnderstode M. Behold a communion and alliance which is greatly to our aduauntage P. It is wholly to oure aduantage and therfore it should so much the more inflame vs in the loue of God and rauishe and carrie vs away in admiration of his goodnesse of Iesus Christ our Lord and of that most excessiue loue wherewith he hathe loued vs. M. That same communion is it the same that is in the Symbole of the Apostles vpon the whiche we are at this presente the communion of Sainctes P. It is the verye same And bicause it is made by the power of the holy Ghoste we will speake more largely of it when we shal speake of the holy Ghost and of the Churche How that Iesus Christe can not be the sauiour of mankinde vnlesse hee haue as well an humane soule as an humane bodie M. I Vnderstand now well by that whiche thou hast expoūded vnto me concerning the humane nature of Iesus Christ that wée could haue no saluation by him if he had not a verye bodie of oure fleshe and substance and that we were fleshe of his fleshe and bone of his bones and except we had suche alliance with hym as ther is betwene the husbād the wife But I would gladly that thou diddest shew me somthing more plainly the causes for the which it is also requisite for our saluation that Iesus Christe haue an humane soule as wel as an humane body P. Euen as we could not be saued if he had not suffered in our humane fleshe and borne the paine for vs whiche we haue deserued by our sinnes it is euen the like concerning the soule M. For what cause P. For bicause that if he had suffred but in our bodie in our flesh he should not then haue satisfied but in our flesh and in our body and for them only and not for the soule And so shoulde it haue come to passe the bodie should bée saued and not the
soule from the whiche sinne cheefely doth procéede For the bodie shoulde not sinne at all if sinne were not firste in the soule M. Why sayst thou so P. Forsomuch as the body is but as it were the instrument of the soule by the whiche she worketh and dothe hir workes wherfore if there be faulte in the worke the faulte maye not be attributed to the instrument but rather to the woorker whiche worketh or else if there bée faulte in the instrumente it is greater in the woorker whiche woorketh euill Mathewe Thou wilte then conclude that it was necessarie that Iesus Chryste shoulde suffer for vs not onely in bodie but also in soule Peter He hathe righte well declared it when he sayde My soule is heauie euen to deathe and when he did sweate bloud in great abundance euen for very sorrowe and anguishe that he felte in his soule in the whyche hee hathe suffered more than in his bodie for so muche as he bare the iudgemente of God in the same chéefly whyche the bodye coulde not apprehende but in as muche as the féeling of it is come to it by the meane of the soule Mathew The passage whiche thou haste euen now alledged séemeth to me very cleare and plaine against those whiche estéeme the Godheade of Iesus Chryste to bée in steade of his soule Peter Iesus Chryste hym selfe hathe yet more confirmed that which thou sayest when he yelded vp his spirite vppon the Crosse and that he sayde Father I commende my soule into thy handes M. This passage sheweth playnely that by the death of Iesus Christ there was a very separation of spirite and bodye and so consequently of the soule for so muche as the spirite is also taken for the soule P. The matter is very plaine For if the diuinitie of Iesus Christ had ben in stead of his soule without a very humane soul he could not haue died of a very humane death forsomuch as it can not dye except there be very separation of bothe bodye and soule in man. The nynth Dalogue is of the offices of Iesus Christ Of the signification and exposition of the name of Christ and of his offices the whiche that name doth comprehend MATHEVV I Do now wel vnderstād all the matter which thou hast nowe handled ther resteth that thou expounde vnto me that which thou hast to say yet concerning the office of Iesus Chryste P. Forsomuche as we haue alredy spokē largely inough when we did speake of the meane by the which man is deliuered from sin made agréed with God that whiche we haue already sayd may serue vs much to that whiche yet resteth to be spokē of M. What wilt thou then say more P. We haue nothing here to consider but only that whiche the name of Iesus Christe doth importe M. And what doth it import P. First he is called by the name of Iesus which signifieth Sauior to admonish vs that he was sent vnto vs from the Father to saue vs and that we may haue saluation by none other but by him only M. And what importeth the name of Christ P. Thrée offices whiche belong vnto him for whose cause he is called by that name M. Whiche be these offices P. The office of a prophet of a king and of a Sacrificator M. What signifyeth then the name of Christe whiche comprehendeth so many things P. It signifieth anointed and bicause that in the auncient Churche of Israell the Prophets kings and sacrificators were annoynted by the ordinance of God in testimonie of their vocation and office they were called by that name and in like wise bycause they were true fygures of the very anoynted of the Lorde which is the very sonne of God whyche was anoynted by the holy Ghoste who was giuen to him withoute measure aboue all other men M. Thou wilte then say that Iesus Christ is also named with that name aswell bycause of the same vinction as bycause that all those offices were enioyned to him by the father P. It is euen so Of the office of a Prophete of Iesus Christ and of the per fection of his doctrine M. SHewe me nowe what euery one of these offices importeth and begin by his office of Prophete Peter As concerning hys office of Prophete hée is not onely a Prophete as those whiche in the Scriptures are called by that name but of an other sorte muche more excellent M. What is the difference that thou there puttest P. I finde there difference chiefly in two points M. Whiche is the firste Peter It is that God hathe not spoken in his Church in the person of Iesus Christe onely in the manner that he hath heretofore spoken by his Prophets in sundry sortes more couert and darke but hath spoken by his owne Sonne plainly and with an open face and hathe shewed vnto vs by him the doctrine of saluatiō so fully and perfectly that we may not attende any other perfection in thys worlde as touching that pointe M. Thy meaning is then that seeing Iesus Christ is come vppon earth he hath brought the doctrine requisite in his Churche so perfecte that no man may adde any thyng more therevnto and that none ought frō that time foorth to loke for any more ample and perfecte reuelation and manifestation of the wil of God. P. Sainct Iohn doth witnesse it vnto vs when he saithe that no man euer sawe God but the sōne which is in the bosom of the Father hath declared him vnto vs For this cause Iesus Christe him selfe hath saide that he hath declared to his disciples all that whiche he hath hearde of his Father Of the povver and efficacie of the ministerie of Iesus Christ and of that vvhich he giueth to the ministerie of others M. WHiche is the other pointe that thou hast yet to expounde concerning the difference whereof thou hast made mention touching the office of prophet of Iesus Christ P. It is that Iesus Christ is not a Prophete hauing none other power but to shew foorth the worde of God by mouth as the other ministers of the same do But beside that he hathe the power to imprinte the same in theyr hartes by the vertue of his holy spirite and to giue it vertue and efficacie in thē M. Thy meaning is then that the other prophets and ministers of the worde of God haue not that power P. Not of them selues but so farre foorth as Iesus Christ doth worke in them and in their ministerie by the diuine power of his holy Spirite And therefore when he commanded his Apostles to go and preache the Gospell and did giue vnto them power to pardon retaine sinnes by him he foorthwith gaue vnto them the holy Ghost brething vppon them in token of the same and afterwarde did send him to them vppon the daye of Pentecost after that he was ascended into Heauen M. I thinke that that whiche thou saist is the cause why Sainct Paule sayd he that
in the death and passion of Iesus Christe and the true and spirituall cōmunion that we haue by the same with all the giftes and graces of the same The second is to yelde thankes vnto him and to giue testimonie of oure faith towards him of our charitie which we haue towards our brethrē and of the vnion with his Church The third to represente to vs by the breade and wyne whyche are there distributed the whole and perfecte spirituall nouriture whiche wée haue by the meane of the bodie flesh and bloud of Iesus Christ to the end that we maye be spiritually nourished into eternall lyfe according to the benefit whiche we haue already receyued by our regeneration whereof the Baptisme is to vs as a Sacramente in the whiche wée haue in the Supper as it were a guage of oure resurrection the whiche wée doe beleeue and wayte for Wherfore euen as the breade and wyne be there giuen to vs visibly and bodily euen so are the bodie and bloud of Iesus gyuen to vs in déed but inuisibly and spiritually by the mean of faith by the vertue of the holy Ghost for he is the meane by whiche wée haue true Cōmunion and true vnion with Iesus Christ and all hys Church the which is his bodye whereof all true Christians are membres Of the signification of the signes of bread and wyne in the Supper and of the agreemente and difference of them with the things that they signifie and of the error of the popish transubstantiation Chap. 40. WE then take the breade the wyne not for the propre body and bloud of Iesus Christe and the very naturall substance of them as if the breade and wyne were transubstantiate and conuerted into that very bodie and bloud to eate and drinke them bodyly and carnally or to worship them as Idols in steade of Iesus Christ as the Papists doe no more do wée take them only as common breade and wyne but we holde them as very signes of that body and bloud which were giuen for vs to death and of the whiche we are spiritually made partakers in dede according to the testimonie which Iesus Christ yeldeth vnto vs by his word in this holy Sacramēt in the meane while the bread and the wine do no more chaunge substance nor qualitie in the same thā doth the water in baptisme or the waxe wherein the seale of the Prince is imprinted also as the body and bloud of Iesus Christe are not naturally nor bodily conioyned with them but only in manner whiche is proper to sacraments that manner is such that albeit the signe be not the thing it selfe which it doth signifie yet is it not without the same whiche is communicated to the faithful spiritually in this Sacramente euen as the signe is administred vnto thē corporally by the meane which hath bene aboue spoken of Of the commemoration of the sacrifice of Iesus Christ in the Supper Chap. 41. ON the contrary we oughte to be assured that this holy Sacramente was not ordeyned to make a Sacrifice in the which Iesus Christe should be offered againe for the redemption of soules as well liuing as dead but to make commemoration of the sacrifice the which Iesus Christe himselfe hath made once of hys owne body and bloud by the whiche he hath once bought and sanctified for euer all the children of god Wherefore he hath ordeyned this holy sacrament to refresh our memorie and to sturre vs vp by this meane to acknowledge him and to render him immortall thanks in waiting that in his last cōming he may appeare from heauen where he now sitteth at the right hande of God vntill the last day Of the Supper and of the Masse of the Papistes and of the principall pointes wherin it is different and contrary to the true Supper Chap. 42. SEing then that the institution of the holy Supper of the Lorde and the ende for the whiche it was ordeined is wholly ouerthrown in the Masse supper of the Papists it is plain that neither the one nor the other not only can not be accōpted for the Supper of the Lorde nor celebrated to suche an ende But ouer and aboue that who soeuer will be accompted a christian and a partaker of the true table of the Lorde maye in no wyse communicate nor assist neyther at the Masse nor Supper of the Papistes if hée wyll not communicate at the Lordes table and at the diuels table altogether For fyrste where Saincte Paule sayeth playnelye that wee must shewe the Lordes death in his Supper and that nothing be declared nor sayde in the Churche but in suche a toung as all men may vnderstand All is sayde in the Masse and supper of the Papiste in a toung which the poore people vnderstande not And they doe not declare vnto them the Institution of the holye Supper of the Lorde The whyche thyng is euen of as greate effecte as yf there were no worde of God at all séeing it is not vnderstoode Without whyche woorde the Supper can not bée the Supper Moreouer the signes are there so confounded with the things which they signifie that they be all one thing wherefore that is as much as to haue sacramēts without signes Thirdly the bread wine are there worshipped as Idols and as Gods newly made wherein there is not one idoll onely but two as if the bloude were separate from the body Fourthly they be there also offered in steade of Iesus Chryste in suche sorte as the masse is holden for a Sacrifice made for the redemption of soules It is holden also for a meritorious woorke whyche bryngeth Saluation vnto men as doth the Deathe and Passion of Chryste Fyfthely is that albéeit there be a certayne kynde of Communyon in the common Supper of the people yet in their Masses there is none at all For so much as the Préest whiche saith it maketh his supper all alone not admitting any one therevnto Wherefore such a supper may better be called an Excommunication than a communication For there is no communication nor communion where nothing is common and where one man alone taketh all that whiche should be distributed to al men in common Now then if there were none other faulte in the masse but only these fiue so muche lacketh it to be accompted the Supper of the Lorde that not only all the true vse of the same is there wholy ouerthrowen but also Iesus Christe is therein fully renounced by those whiche communicate there or beleue it And by the same meane the vertue efficacie of the death and passion of Christe is there vtterly of none effecte and abolished Of the proofe that euery man oughte to make of him selfe to communicate worthily at the supper and of the things required in the same Chap. 43. FVrder seing that the holy supper is ordeyned to suche an ende as hath bene alredy declared none may communicate in the same but to his condemnation which cōmeth
satisfied the iudgemente of God for vs in our flesh and nature vnited with the diuine nature Of the vnion of the diuine and humaine nature in the person of Iesus Christ and of his office D. Wilt thou then say that Iesus Christ is very God and very man in one selfe person A. If he were not so he could not be our sauioure redéemer mediatoure and Aduocate as he is nor yet the true Christ and anointed of the Lorde Of the vvorks of viuification and sanctification D. What dost thou vnderstande by the works of sanctification and viuification A I take it here in generall for that worke whereby God doth viuifie and regenerate into newe life and doth sanctifie and consecrate his electe to him selfe and his seruice bestowing vppon them the benefites of his sonne Iesus Christ by the vertue of the holy Ghost D. Dost thou meane that God doth presente vnto vs his gifts and graces by his Son Iesus Christ and that he maketh vs partakers capable of thē by his holy spirit A. Euen so do I meane and that he is the only meane by the which we may haue vniō cōmunion with him Of the Churche D. For so muche as wée haue spoken of God and of his workes there remaineth yet that thou tell me what thou haste to say concerning the Church A. I vnderstand the Churche to be the companie of all those whiche are vnited and ioyned to Iesus Christe thorowe true faith in him as membres of his body by the vertue of the holy Ghost whiche is the true and very bande of that vnion and cōiunction D. Vnderstandest thou that they be the true Church which are sanctified and consecrated to God by true faith in suche sorte as thou hast euen now sayd That is the very cause for the whiche she is called holye and the communion of Saintes Of the things whiche we ought to beleeue of the Churche D. Which be the principall poyntes that we ought to beléeue concerning the church A. We may well bring them into two D. Which is the first A. It is that there is a Churche that is to say one such companie and communaltie as I haue euen nowe spoken of vnited by the spirite of God of the whiche all the faithful which are thorow out the world are true membres D. And the second A. It is touching the benefites of Iesus Christ whiche are communicated to this holy companie by the vertue of the holy Ghost Of the benefites of Iesus Christe towardes his Churche D. Whiche be these benefites A. Wée maye againe consider them in two sorts D. Howe may that be A. The firste is in the possession of the same into the whiche we doe enter being euen here in this worlde D. And the seconde A. In the full enioying and consummation that we shall haue in the other lyfe Of the possession of the benefites of Iesus Christ in the church during this lyfe D. What vnderstandest thou by the possessiō that we haue alredie in this world A. That euen as ther is no saluatiō out of the Church so al they that are true members of the same do there find perfect saluation the which we do fully comprehende in the Simbole of the Apostles vnder the remission of sinnes D. For what cause is that done A. Bycause it comprehendith the agrement which we haue with God and the iustification by the which we are holden for iust in his sight from whence then afterwarde procéede the other benefites whiche are also communicate vnto vs by Iesus Christ Of the consummation of the benefits of Iesus Christe D. What vnderstandest thou by the consummation of these benefites A. That same eternal and blessed life in the which we shall liue eternally with him in the kingdome of God in body and soule being fully regenerate and reformed to the Image and likenesse of him Of the frutes and effects of the lawe and of good vvorks D. Now that we haue spoken of faith and of the principall points to whiche she hath regard tell me if this faith be sufficiente to saue vs A. Yea in dede if it be true and not fayned D. Nede we then not to do good works to be saued A. Albeit that we can do no workes of our selues by the which we may deserue any thing other thā eternall damnation it followeth not for all that but that we be bounde to do the good works whiche God requireth of vs. D. Thou art not then of minde that faith doth abolish good workes A. So farre of is it from abolishing them that on the cōtrary there is nothing that doth more establish them but not to séeke mans saluation in them D. Howe vnderstandest thou this A. Euen as faith which is a very gifte of God is giuen vs to obtayne by the same remission of all our sinnes by Iesus christ she hath also this vertue that through hir man is regenerate and made like to the image of God to obey him according to his lawe where before he hath bin a rebell against him D. Wilte thou then saye that faith is not true faith if she be not declared by works which God requireth of vs in his lawe A. It is fayth as the fire that is without heat and light is fire Of the good workes which God requireth of the faithfull D. Séeing the matter is so tell mée then in bréefe what works god requireth of vs in his law to testifie of our fayth as well towards him as towards men A. Wée may comprehend them all summarily in two points D. Which is the first A. The inuocation of the name of god D. The secōd A The charitie towards our neybor Of the inuocation of the name of God. D What things comprehendest thou vnder the inuocation of the name of God A. I do comprehende thrée in taking it generally as I take it here D. Whiche is the firste A. The supplication and prayer whereby we haue recourse to God in all our necessities D. The second A. It is thankesgiuing wherby we acknowledge the goodnesse that wée haue receyued of him D. The thirde A. It is the profession and confession of our faith and religiō by the which he wil be aduowed and glorified in vs towards al men as our God. Of the sum of the first table of the law De. It semeth to me that these thre points conteyne as it were a sūme of all the first Table of the lawe A. If we adde therevnto faith which is the true fountaine of all these things this summarie shal be full and perfecte D. How so A. For that that it shall comprehende the manner how God will be serued and honored of vs as well in harte as in word and in outward works Of the summe of the second Table D. What doth the charitie towarde our neighboure comprehende A. We may in like sorte bring it all into two pointes D. Which is
that whiche thou sayest when they did wryte the genealogie of Iesus Christ the which is broughte foorth by S. Matthewe euen from Abraham and by S. Luke from Adam euen to Iesus Chryst P. They haue had regarde to that whiche thou sayest in déede but they would shew further that he was the true Chryst and the true Sauiour and redéemer that was promised to Israell bycause that hée was descended of the lyue of those of whome the holy Ghoste hathe forespoken by the mouthe of the holy patriarches Prophetes that he shoulde descende Of the woorkes of the holye Ghost in the conception of Iesus Christ M. BVt if he haue taken his fleshe of the line and of the proper fleshe of men who are all sinners howe could he be more without sinne in his fleshe than other men P. The angel hath answered this difficultie when he sayd to the virgin that she should conceiue the sonne of God by the power and workyng of the holye Ghost Mathevve What meanest thou by that vertue and working of the holie Ghost P. I meane that the holy Ghost wrought in that conception so by hys diuine power that the fleshe whyche Iesus Christe tooke of the Virgine Marie was in suche sorte sanctifyed that he dyd purifie and exempt it from all sinne and from all the corruption whereby the whole nature of man is corrupted bycause of sinne that is naturally in it Of the true substance of the bodie of Iesus Christe M. WE may not then imagine in Iesus Chryste a bodie that is so heauenly and diuine that it is not a very mans bodye of verie humane fleshe and substance but wée must beléeue in déede that he is of verye humane substaunce as wée are Pet. Thou concludest verye well And in lyke sorte also wée maye not imagine that this humane bodie of Iesus Christ is a bodie only in apparance as a fantasme as some heretikes haue affirmed auncientlye For if hee hadde not taken a verye mans bodie wée coulde haue no hope of Saluation by him The eyght Dialogue is of the communion betwene Iesus Christe and man. Of the communion of the nature vvhich Iesus Chryst hath with man and not with angels and how necessarie it is to mans saluation MATHEVV DEclare to mée the cause why mā can not be saued if Iesus Chryste had no cōmunion of nature with him P. Why are not the angels also which sinned saued by the deathe and passion of Iesus Christe the whiche are called diuels in the holie Scriptures as well as man who hath sinned as they haue doone M. Bicause that Iesus Christ was not sente by the Father to that effecte and he also came not to saue them but man only P. For that cause also he hath not taken the nature of angels to haue communication of nature with them and to vnite it with his diuine nature to satisfie for them in their owne nature as it pleased him to be vnited with man by vnion of nature to satisfie for them in their owne fleshe as though they themselues did satisfie in their owne person the which he hath endured and represented before the iudgement of God. M. Thou wilte then saye that it was necessarie that the son of God should communicate with our fleshe and bloud by that same vnion of nature and that without this vnion and cōmunication we cannot be saued and redemed by him P. If it hadde not ben necessarie that he should haue had such vnion and communication with vs to revnite vs and to cal vs againe into the sauour of God it had not béen néedfull that he had beene made man. M. God hath then doone vs an honour and shewed vs a fauour in the person of his sonne howe poore and wicked sinners soeuer we be whiche he hath not doone to the angels whiche sinned P. In that same we may know howe much he hath loued vs of his owne goodnesse and howe great and infinite his charitie was towarde vs Wherefore we should also by the same very meane well learne to knowe howe well we ought to loue him on oure parts Of two sortes of vnion and communion vvhiche Iesus Christe hath with man without the which no man can obtayne saluation M. BVt is it sufficient for the saluation of man that the sonne of God was made man to beare the iudgemente the wrathe and cursse of God in their owne nature and their owne fleshe Pe. If that were sufficient al shold be saued indifferently aswel the reprobats as the elect the vnbeleuers as the faithful as we haue alredie touched it heretofore M. Is there then any other maner of vnion cōmunion whereby we must be vnited ioyned with Iesus Christ to obtein saluatiō by him P. Thou mayst iudge by that which we haue alredy sayd of the comuniō that we haue with him thorough faith and of the iustification by the same M. I do very wel remember that thou hast already somwhat touched it but I woulde very gladly that thou didst expoūd the same vnto me somwhat more largely P. The communication of the which we haue nowe spoken is natural and therfore it is common to al men with Iesus Chryst in so much as they be of the same nature of the same flesh that he hathe taken for vs. Ma. And the other Pe. It is spirituall and therefore it is more speciall for it is not generally common to al but it is only propre to the elect and faithfull Of the spirituall marriage betweene Iesus Chryste and his Churche and firste of the vnion of nature that is required in this mariage M. EXpound to me what this vnion and cōmunion conteineth more thā the first P. I wil declare vnto thée by similitude of mariage wherof S. Paul hath vsed to this purpose in the epist. to the Ephesiās M. Expounde vnto me then the similitude P. Nature doth shew vs also teach vs the aliāce cōmuniō of mariage coulde not be betwene mā womā if they were not both liuīg creatures of one very kind and of one very flesh nature M. Albeit that the brute beasts haue ben created of the same very matter whereof man and woman ar created as concerning the bodie yet for al that I know wel that there is greate difference touching the kindes and that man and woman haue a farre other vnion and communion of fleshe and nature together thā w other liuing creatures whiche we do call beastes P. And therfore after that god had created Adam and that his pleasure was to giue him an ayde in mariage he woulde create thys ayde whiche is the woman of the verye flesh and substance of Adam himselfe to the ende that they shuld be one very flesh and one verie body as in déede Adam did right wel know when he saw the womā immediately after that she was so created Wherfore he sayd This here is flesh of my fleshe and bone of my bones and
Chryste thorough faythe after that GOD by the same hathe iustified vs by his holye Spirite in Iesus Chryste oure Lorde he dothe also sanctifye vs communicating vnto vs his gyftes and Graces whyche are the frutes of Faythe to the ende that we shoulde bée dedicated and consecrated vnto hym all the dayes of our lyfe to serue and honour hym as hys childrē regenerate by his holy spirite into a newe life Ma. Thou doest reporte faith to iustification and charitie to the worke of sanctification whiche are both works of the holy Ghost P. Thou maiest vnderstand it by the discourse whiche we haue already made of iustification and sanctification In vvhat sorte charitie is necessary to saluation M. CHaritie is not then necessarie to saluation nor other like vertues but faith only P. It is necessary there vnto and not necessary M. I do not well vnderstand this speache for it is contrary in it selfe P. I say that faith is necessary therevnto as cause of saluation withoute the whiche we cannot obtayne it for the causes which I haue alredy declared For somuch as it is the instrument the whiche the holy Ghoste giueth vs wherewith to receiue him when he is offered vnto vs by Iesus Christ and the meane whereby he doth communicate him to vs in hym and by him But charitie is not there ioyned as a cause of saluation without the which we cannot be partakers of it but as a thing ioyned vnto it the whiche followeth faith in suche sorte whiche is the true cause of saluation as I haue already sayde that she cannot be separate no more than the heate from the lighte or the mouing or féeling from the life and from the soule But yet notwithstandyng we haue not saluation thereby no more than brightnesse by the heate the whiche we haue of the lighte or else life by the motion and féeling M. Charitie then and good workes may not be taken for causes by the which or by whose meane we obtaine saluation but onely so farre as they cannot be separated frō true faith by the which we ar made partakers of it P. It is euen so M. Thou hast here opened vnto me one point that was very harde to vnderstande the whiche séemeth to me very well worthy to be diligently noted For there bée fewe whiche do well vnderstande it Peter If all men did well vnderstande it there woulde be no more differente betwene the Christians touching iustification and touching faith and workes and grace and merites and the causes of oure saluation for that whiche we haue sayde of charitie is also vnderstoode of all the other vertues and workes of the regenerate man as I haue alredy sayde whiche are the frutes the which Saincte Paule doth call the frutes of the spirite and the which he doth oppone to the frutes of the flesh Of the regeneration of a Christian man. M. SEing that thou arte lighted vppon the pointe of regeneration me thinketh that it should be also comprehended among those giftes of the holy Ghost the which thou sayest do belong but to the elect of God and be so necessarie to saluation that none may attayne vnto it without them P. It must be so vnderstoode for it is of the chiefe of them and in very déede it is the principall pointe whiche maketh vs to vnderstande the cause why we do cal worke of viuification and sanctification that thirde worke of God whereby we say that God hathe declared himselfe vnto men Ma. Expounde the same to me somewhat more plainely P. Thys worde of regeneration as thou mayest well vnderstande emporteth as muche as a man moughte saye newe birth as if after that we are once borne we are borne yet agayne Mathevve I sée well that the worde of regeneration importeth euen so Peter And therefore it importeth foorthwith a reformation of the man whiche is a rising agayne from the deade whiche is wroughte in the Spirite as the last resurrection shall be wroughte in the fleshe Mathevve What meanest thou by that resurrection of the Spirite Peter Séeing that thorough sinne man is deade of spirituall death whiche bringeth afterwarde death of the body he is as it were risen from that deathe when by Iesus Christe he is in suche sorte delyuered from sinne that he is by the vertue of hys holye Spirite made as it were a manne thoroughly newe or as a manne who hauinge béene deade shoulde haue recouered hys lyfe and shoulde bée raysed agayne Mathevve Thou puttest then so great difference betwene the man whiche abideth still in his firste nature corrupted through sinne and hée which is deliuered from the same corruption and is quickened and regenerated by the holy Ghoste as thou puttest betwene a dead and a liuing man. P. There is no difference but in asmuch as the spirituall death is much more worthy to be called death than is the corporall death and that the estate of the man dead thorough sinne is much more perillous and daungerous than is the estate of the man which is dead but bodily Of the life of the regenerate man. M. Séeing that man is as it were risen from death and borne a new when he is regenerate by the holy Ghost it followeth then necessarily that he do other works after that he is regenerate than he did before his regeneration P. Thou mayest wel vnderstand that if there be so greate differēce betwene the mā regenerate the not regenerate as is betweene a dead and a liuing man it must also necessarily come to passe that there bee as great difference betwene the workes of the one and the other M. I do euen so vnderstand it P. And therfore Iesus Chryst hath sayd that what is borne of fleshe is fleshe and what is borne of the spirite is spirit For euen as a dead bodie can bring forth but infection and corruption euen so on the contrary a liuing body doth the works of lyfe bicause of the liuing soule that he hath more than hath the dead bodie M. It foloweth then that the faith wherby man is viuified and regenerate is vnto him as the soule which bringeth to him spiritual life and that the vnfaithful and not regenerate man is as a body without a soule P. S. Paule following the prophet Abacuk giueth thée playnly to vnderstand that it is so by that whiche he sayth The iust man shall liue of his faith Wherefore if the iust man do liue of his faith it followeth then that Faith is to his soule to giue it spirituall lyfe that whiche the naturall soule is to the bodie to giue it corporall lyfe Mathevv There are then two things to be considered in the regenerate spiritual man to wit Faith which is in him as the soule whiche giueth him spiritual lyfe euen as the soule naturall which giueth corporall lyfe to the body then the workes of the spirite are ioyned to it which are the works of faith which is the spiritual soule euen as the works of life
by the vertue of the same and therfore the holy Ghost is often signified in the holy Scriptures by water M. Are there yet any other proprieties P. Wée can not vnderstād our regeneration into a new creature to be made new men except wée vnderstād also the mortificatiō of our old nature which is our old Adam and our old man And therfore S. Paule sayth That by baptisme we ar dead and buried risen agayn with Iesus Chryst M. Is the water propre to signifie the deth burial of the old mā the resurrectiō and renewing of the newe P. The water alone doth not represēt vnto vs only these things but also the maner in the whiche it is administred in baptisme M. Howe may that be P. Thou séest that cōmonly it is poured vpon him that is baptised in token that our old Adam is drowned and dead in Iesus Christ as the olde Pharao and the Egyptians were drowned in the redde sea And therfore Saint Paul compareth baptisme to the passage thorowe the red sea M. And what signifieth thys that they doe but poure this water vpon him that is baptized P. The same signifieth vnto vs howe that of the death of the olde man the newe riseth as if our olde Adam after that he were drowned were risen againe a newe man and that all his olde filthines were drowned by the water of grace in the which he was plunged which is the bloode of Iesus Christe the true washer of regeneration M. I doe nowe vnderstand all this very well but is there any other proprietie to consider touching the water P. If we shuld make comparisō of all the other properties that it hath with the holy Ghost which it doth figure in Baptisme I could giue thée manie others from which I doe abstaine at this present seing that that which I haue said may suffice thée for the vnderstāding of the matter of Baptisme Of the admonition and figure that the faithfull haue of a Christian life in Baptisme M. HAst thou yet any thing to say touching this Sacrament P. I haue nowe to shewe thée what pattern and example wée haue there of a Christian life and of the dutie of a Christian and of true repentance which ought to be in him all the time of his life M. Expound all these to me P. Séeing that baptisme is to vs the Sacrament of regeneration of penaunce and of mortification wée are admonished by the same of the perpetuall penance that ought to be in vs of the mortification where by we ought to mortifie our earthly mēbers to the end that wée being dead to sinne may liue to God in iustice Of the Supper and why Iesus Christe did ordaine two signes for the same M. IT séemeth to mée nowe that I doe sufficiently vnderstand that matter of Baptisme and therfore lette vs procéede to the Supper P. The Supper is a Sacrament in the which Iesus Christ representeth to vs by the signe of breade and wine howe he hath giuen his bodie and his bloud to the deathe that hauyng reconciled vs vnto God he moughte bee our spirituall nouriture and mought cōfirme vs in the faith of the promisse whiche he had made vnto vs. M. For what cause hathe he represented his bodie and bloud by the bread and by the wyne P. To signifie vnto vs that euen as breade and wine are giuen to vs by God for our corporall nouriture euen so the bodye and bloud of Iesus Chryste is giuen vnto vs for spiritual foode M. And for what cause did Iesus Chryste ordeyne two signes in the supper but one in baptism Mought not the bread or the wine onely haue ben sufficient to represent this spirituall life without adding both of them P. As he hath ordeined the signe of the water whiche is very méete to represente that whiche in Baptisme he woulde represent vnto vs euen so he hath chosen for the Supper those signes that were most méet to signifie that which he wold haue signifyed in the same M. I doubte not at all of that P. And therfore albeit that by one onely signe as in Baptisme he coulde haue done all that whiche hath pleased him to do by two yet he woulde giue two for the better expressing of that whiche it pleased him to giue Of that whiche is speciall in the Supper wherein it differeth from baptisme and howe that all that is verye well represented in the bread and the wyne M. DEclare vnto mée then the properties whiche the breade and wine haue agréeable to the things the whiche they represent in the supper P. For the first thou must note and remember that whiche I haue alreadie touched that the supper hathe this proper vnto it that euen as baptisme is to vs a testimonie of our spiritual birth life which we obtayn by Iesus Christe euen so is the supper a sacrament and testimonie howe that God wil continue in vs that benefite whereof baptisme is to vs a Sacrament and will nourishe and entertayne vs in the same spirituall lyfe the which he signifieth vnto vs therin vnto the tyme that we haue the full enioying in heauen with Iesus Chryst M. I thinke than that to be the cause why Iesus Chryste would signifie those things to vs by the eating and drinking and by those things which are propre to nouriture P. It is euen so and for somuche as man can not lyue by meate only or drinke only except he haue them bothe togither no more is Iesus Chryst contented to ordeyne only the breade or only the wine for signes of the spirituall nouriture whiche wée haue in his Supper but would ordeine those two to giue vs to vnderstande that euen as he which hathe meate and drinke hath his whole nouriture euen so the faithefull haue in Iesus Chryst fully all that whiche is necessarie for the spiritual lyfe M. Is there yet none other reason why Iesus Chryst did ordeyn those two signes M. Yes for Iesus Christe hathe also by these two signes better expressed howe that he hath giuen his bodie and his lyfe to the deathe for vs thā if he had ordeined but one only in so much as he hath giuen one particuler signe to signifie his body and an other to signifye his bloude M. What further signification hath it P. To set the better before our eyes howe that he is in déede dead for vs in so much as his bloude was separated from his body and consequentlye his life and that he hath so loued vs that he hath not spared it for vs. How we must eate the body and fleshe of Iesus Christ and drinke his bloud in the Supper M. BVt séeing that the breade representeth vnto vs in the Supper the fleshe and bodie of Iesus Christ which is there gyuen vs for meate and that the wine representeth the bloude which is there gyuen vs for drink must wée there also eate the body of Iesus Christ and drinke hys bloude in the same
by the whiche we haue bene sometyme taught that the very substāce of the bread and of the wine was chaunged into the very substance of the body of the bloud of Iesus Chryst which ar of the opinion that thou now settest forth M. And why do they rather folow that opinion than the other P. Bicause that they know well that opinion to be too grosse And therfore they haue recourse to that other maner of presence of the bodie and bloud of Iesus Chryste in the Supper whereof thou haste now made mention M. And what inconueniente fyndest thou in that opinion Peter I fynde not muche lesse therein than in that of Transubstantiation Math. Thou canste not saye at the leaste but that they whiche followe it doe take from the Supper the signes of the breade and of the wyne for so much as they ioyne them wyth the bodie and the bloud of Iesus Chryste the whiche they signifie Peter No more are they also so greatlye different in other matters to them that mayntain transubstantiation And therfore may we lawfully call the opiniō of such men cōsubstantiation M. What vnderstandest thou by this word of Consubstantiation P. As they which haue forged the transubstātiation do vnderstand by the same a changing of substance into an other euen so by the name of consubstantiation a man may vnderstande the coniunction of diuers substances togither Of the agreement that is betwene this opinion that of transubstantiation M. DEclare vnto me then wherin they do agrée and wherin they doe differ Peter For the first if they doe vnderstande that the bodie and the bloud of Iesus Christe bée wyth the breade and the wine in their own nature and substance and by a naturall corporall and materiall maner as the bread and the wyne are there they agrée therin with the erroure of transubstantiation M. It séemeth to mée that they drawe well to one poynte sauing that they make no transubstantiation nor chaunge of the breade and of the wine into the body and bloude of Iesus Christ P. Thou séest it plainely by that whiche we haue alredy sayde thou mayest well vnderstand that such a naturall and corporall presence of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ in the Supper should be cleane contrary to the nature of a spirituall nouriture the whiche is there set foorth vnto vs and likewise to the māner of eating of the body and the flesh and the drinking of the bloud of Iesus Christ according to the whiche they may be eatē and dronkē for spirituall meate drinke The seauententh Dialogue is of the communication of Iesus Christ as wel in Baptisme as in the Supper VVherevnto baptisme and the signification thereof may serue to giue vs to vnderstand in vvhat sorte it behoueth vs to be nourished by the body and bloud of Iesus Christ MATHEVV I Haue well vnderstoode that thou hast sayde that we must be nourished with spirituall meate and nouriture into eternall life and that by a spirituall maner agreable to the spirituall birth and life into the which we are regenerate by baptisme and according to the testimonie of God which is set foorth vnto vs in the same concerning our regeneration P. That whiche thou sayest maye serue vs very much to the vnderstanding of the matter which we now hādle For thou doest wel know that we are not regenerate in baptisme by any corporall or material séede of the body and of the bloude of Iesus Christe nor by any naturall manner as we are naturally begotten by our fathers mothers M. I know well also that we may not enter againe into our mothers womb as Nicodeme said to Iesus christ to be borne a new once more as we are already once borne P. And therefore I doubt not but that thou doest well vnderstande that that regeneration and newe birth is wrought by a séede incorruptible spiritual and diuine by the which we are begotten into the Churche by the vertue of the holy Ghoste by whome we are regenerate into a new life In vvhat sorte vve do communicate of the body bloud of Iesus christ in baptism M. IT is not also said that Iesus Christ doth giue his body and his bloud in Baptisme as he doth in the supper like wise the water is not called therein the body and the bloud of Iesus Christe as Iesus Christ doth in the Supper call the bread the wine by the name of them P. Albeit the the water be not there called in baptisme by that name dost thou thinke for all that that the body and bloude of Iesus Christ be not there distributed and communicated vnto thée in the same as well as in the Supper M. I do not so vnderstand it P. Thou wilte then ordeyne a Baptisme withoute Iesus Christe M. Wherfore P. Bycause thou cāst not haue Iesus Christ except thou haue him wholy and very God and very man and that thou haue true communion with his body with his bloud not only in the supper but also in baptisme M. Shewe me the cause thereof P. It is bycause that the Baptisme doth no lesse sende vs to the deathe and passion and to the body and bloud of Iesus Christe than doth the Supper for somuch as that is proper to al sacramēts VVhat difference there is betvvene the baptisme and the Supper touching the communion of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ M. IT séemeth to me that thou speakest against that whiche thou hast sayde heretofore touching the difference which thou hast put betwene baptisme and the Supper for it séemeth that thou speakest now as though baptisme the supper were one very Sacramente and that there were no difference betwene them P. Thou makest an euill conclusion For albeit that we doe as well participate of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ in baptisme as in the Supper yet notwithstanding there is difference in the participation and in the manner thereof in respect of the benefites of Iesus Christ whiche are signified and communicated vnto vs as wel in the one of the sacramēts as in the other M. I haue not thē wel vnderstoode thée yet heretofore and therfore declare vnto me more easily that whiche thou now speakest of P. Although the body of Iesus Christe be not giuen vnto vs in baptisme as for spirituall foode as it is in the Supper that notwithstanding it is there giuen vnto vs in very déede as a garment of innocencie of Iustice and of holynesse to couer all our sinnes before god And therefore S. Paule saith that all those which are baptised haue put on them Iesus Christ M. And of the bloud what sayest thou P. Albeit that it be not giuen vnto vs in Baptisme as for drinke as it is in the supper yet notwithstāding it is there giuen vnto vs for a spirituall washing of our soules and consciences whereby Iesus Christe dothe purifie and clense his Church in this lauer of
both in heauē and in earth S. Paule in like fort hath written that he is ascended aboue all the heauens to the ende he mought fill al things that he mought fulfill all in the same M. Doest thou vnderstand that he doth accomplishe and fill all things not by his corporall presence but by his spirituall diuine presēce and vertue P. We may not otherwise vnderstand it if we do beleue that Iesus christ hath a very natural body that he be in déede gone vp into the heauens For as we haue alredy said as ther is no reason to giue him many bodies to be in manye places at a time euē so is it ouer strange to giue hym a bodye which may fill the heauen and the earth Hovve that the corporall presence of the body and of the bloude of Iesus Christ is contrary to the true communion of them in the Supper M. I Doe now remember that thou hast alredy said that the body the bloud of Iesus Christ could not be separated frō his spirit frō whence I do conclude that the body and bloud of christ Iesus cānot be receiued but to the saluation of them which doe receiue it P. None may doubt thereof M. It followeth then further that infidells cannot receiue them forsomuch as they cannot receiue them except they receiue their saluation the whyche they cannot obtaine without faith wherof they are void P. This which thou sayest dothe yet confirme more and more all that whiche we haue handled heretofore concerning the corporall presence of Iesus Christ in the Supper M. It is also the cause why I did againe set foorth thys matter For if the body and the bloude of Iesus Christ be corporally in the supper in suche sorte that whosoeuer receiueth bodily the bread and the wine therein receiueth also the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ corporally there shall follow thereof many things which séeme to me very contrary as well to the office of Iesus christ as to the nature of this Sacrament of the Supper P. Thou sayest very truthe and I am very glad to here of thée that which thou thinkest M. For the firste we shall be constrayned to confesse that a man maye in the Supper receiue the body and the bloude of Iesus Christe without faith and without his spirite for the vnfaithfull whiche shall receiue the bread and the wine shall no lesse receiue the body and the bloud of Iesus Christe than the faithfull P. Beholde there a very straunge consequencie M. Moreouer if a man may receyue them without faithe they whiche shall receiue them in such sorte shal receiue thē either to their saluation or condemnation if they receiue thē to their saluation it must néedes followe that a man maye obtaine saluation without faith if they do receiue thē to their condemnation it must then followe that the body and the bloude of Iesus Christe do bring in this Sacramente against their nature deathe in stéede of life whiche is also against the nature of the Sacramente for it was not ordeyned to bring death to man but life VVhether a man maye conclude of the vvords of Sainct Paule that a man may receyue the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ in the supper to condemnation P. THou concludest very well but they which houlde the opinion againste the whiche we dispute at this presente make no difference to affirme that the infidels receiue in the supper the body the blud of Iesus Christ that they receyue thē to their condēpnation For they build themselues vpō that which s Paule hath saide That who so eateth in the supper the bread drincketh the wine of the lorde vnworthily doth eate and drinke his condempnation M. I know well that those mē affirme that which thou saist But I cannot well agrée their opinion with the matters the which we haue alredy handled And as touching that which they alledge of S. Paule he sayth not who so shall eate the body and drincke the bloud vnworthily shal receiue his condempnation but he saith he that shall eate of this bread shall drinke of this cup. P. Thou hast also to note beside this that there is difference betwene receiuing the supper vnworthily to receiue it without faith and as touching the word of condempnation it may be also taken in diuers maners but wée will now no longer dwell vpon these two pointes It is sufficient for vs to knowe that the bodye and the bloud of Iesus Christ cannot bée truely receyued but by the faythfull Of the principall difference that maye be betvveene the transsubstanciation of the bread and of the vvine into the bodie and the bloud of Iesus christ and the bodily coniunction of them together M. I Do well vnderstand by all the reasons testimonies which thou hast brought out of the holy scriptures that we may seke no corporal nor carnall presēce of Iesus christ neither in the supper nor yet in all thys visible worlde but only a spirituall and diuine presence Wherfore whē I haue well considered the whole I finde no great difference betwene them that affirme that the bread and the wine be conuerted transubstanciated into the bodie blud of Iesus christ in the supper by the vertue of the sacramentall wordes those which affirme that albeit that the bread the wine remayne still in their owne substāce yet notwithstāding the body blud of Iesus christ be there also present with thē in their proper and natural substāce not only spiritually but also corporally substancially as are the bread the wine P. There is no great difference but in that that the one sort thinking to auoid the absurdities which follow the opinion of the others do fall into other absurdities which are nothing lesse of the which we will no more speake here bycause the matter woulde be to long whereof we haue alredy sufficiently spoken Of the vnion that is betvvene Iesus Christ and his members signified by the breade and the vvine in the Supper M. I Am very well contented for thys time with that which thou hast said and therefore shewe me now what properties the bread and the wine haue yet which are agreable to this Sacramente of the Supper beside that whiche thou hast already said P. I haue already sayd that those signs were agreable to this sacrament bycause they be apte to represent the spirituall nouriture by the bodily M. I doe very well remember thys pointe P. Thou hast also to note vppon the same that as one lofe and one vessell of wine are made of many graines gathered togither euen so doe they in the Supper represente vnto vs how that al the children of God which are dispersed are gathered broughte togither in one and vnited with Iesus Christ their head by his deathe as Saincte Iohn doth witnesse M. Thou wilte then saye that that vniō which is made of many graines in one lofe or in one wine