nature For albeit that a man may not see and perceyue the substances but by their accidents it foloweth not for all that that all accidents do agree with euery substance but are attributed vnto them according to their nature and distinguished as thei are or otherwise al nature should be confounded in a marueilous cōfusion of substances and accidents And further wee haue to note that among accidents there be some that are so proper and natural to their substance whereof they be accidents that they may not be separated without corrupting the subiect which sustayneth them in sort that when they shall be separated it is no more that which it was when they were ioyned vnto it And by this meane the bread the wine may be no more bread and wine if they haue not the colour the sauour the other qualities which are proper and naturall vnto them And if they cannot be that which they should naturally bee without their natural qualities and other accidentes their qualities and accidents may much lesse be without their substance Chap. iii. That the bread and the wine of the Supper can not be the true signes of the same if they do not remayne alway bread wine in their proper substance and nature and that the transsubstanciators cannot couer their errour with a couer of miracle FRom whence it followeth of two thinges the one which is that the bread wine remaine alwaies bread and wine aswell after the pronunciation of the sacramentall woordes as before forsomuch as they doe alwayes keepe their first nature as all the senses may iudge the which are not false or els it must be that there is some illusion which deceiueth the senses and that maketh the thinges to appeare otherwise then they are in deede by meane whereof the signes should be false not true signes Wherefore being false they could not be fignes of true things for the trouth cannot be represented by a lie nor the true by a false forsomuch as there must needes be a true correspondance betwene the signes and the thinges which they signifie They must then confesse that the accidents are wholly without substance and without subiect against the whole order of God and of nature or els that the accidents of bread and of wine be the accidents of the bodie of the bloud of Iesus Christ and that the same body and the same bloud are the subiect and the substance of them On which side soeuer they will take it Note they shal alwaies fall into marueilous absurdities For they may not here alledge miracle if that they will not by that meanes ouerthrowe the whole nature of the miracles of God as by their doctrine they do ouerthrowe the whole order of nature For as the power of God may not be separated from his wisdome by the which he neuer employeth his power but wisely and keeping alwaies good order euen so no more doth hee be it that he worke naturally or supernaturally but that he maketh that which he hath made that that which is is the same in deede that it is For if it were otherwise he should be against him selfe and against his owne woorkes Note And therefore albeit that he be almightie yet for all that he doth not neither also will he doe that the bread and the wine shall be bread and wine and that notwithstanding they shall not be at al and that they are are not at all euen together that which they are and that he would that they should be The which thing they should be if the bread and the wine of the supper did keepe continually their former nature as they do in deed and the experience sheweth if and yet for al that they should not hold their proper substance without the which they could not haue nor kepe their naturall vertue as in deede they do hold it aswell after the consecration as before And if they wil not confesse it they must then needes confesse that the naturall senses which God hath giuen vs doe deceyue vs and that the bodily and outward senses doe shewe false things to the spiritual and inward senses And if it be so there is then the woorke of God corrupted and his order wholly peruerted For euen as wee may not separate his wisedome from his power no more may wee also separate his will the which wee cannot knowe but so farre forth as he declareth by his worde Nowe he hath not declared vnto vs by the same that the bread which should be baked betweens two hote prons should be conuerted into the body of his sonne Iesus Christ by the vertue of certaine wordes spoken ouer it by the priests so appointed qualified as they are in the Romaine Church nor that the same hath euer bene done nor that it shall be done as he hath declared that his sonne should take vnto him our flesh and that he should be conceyued in the wombe of a virgine of whom he should be borne and that he should be conuersant not inuisibly but visibly among men Euen so is it of all the other articles of our faith But of that of Transsubstanciation there is no one Prophet which hath euer prophecied any thing nor Apostle no Euangelist that euer wrote any thing in such sorte as the transsubstanciatours doe expound it and set it forth For this cause the true auncient Church and the auncient doctors and diuines of the same by whose handes wee haue receiued al the symboles which the Church yet at this day vseth which doe conteyne the Articles of our faith haue not set downe any thing touching this Transsubstanciation nor no one of them which doe depend no not in the very symbole the which the priestes doe recite and sing in their masse Chapter iiii That the doctrine of transsubstanciation can not be true without spoyling of Iesus Christe and his humaine nature NOw if they take their second point whereof I haue lately spoken they redouble their faulte for by that meane they spoyle Iesus Christ of the proprieties without the which his humaine nature cannot be a true humaine nature in sort that they giue him a humaine bodie the which altogether and at one time shal be a humaine and not a humaine bodie For it cannot be a true humaine bodie if it haue not al that which is proper to a true humaine bodie and without the which it cannot be an humaine bodie be it glorified or not glorified For it must needes be alway that a bodie be a bodie be it glorified or not and not a spirite and that it doe keepe alway his naturall proprieties without the which it cannot be a true bodie and such as God hath created it and would that it should be For euen as the soule of man vnited to his bodie cannot be a bodie because that it is a spirite but remayneth alway a soule and spirite euen so the
bodie cannot be the soule because it cannot be a spirite or els if it be conuerted into spirit it is no more a bodie as also the spirite is no more the spirite if it be conuerted into bodie The like is of the bodie and of the soule of Iesus Christe and of his diuine and humaine nature of the which euery one of them holdeth so continually his proprieties that the one cannot be that which the other is For albeit that they be vnited together by personall vnion yet for all that they remaine alway distinct in their vnitie according to their proprieties and not confused in sort that the one cannot be the other wherefore we may not say at all that the diuinitie is the humanitie or that the humanitie is the diuinitie nor that the one is conuerted into the other For if there were such a conuersion they should no more be that which they are but should be chaunged into other natures which thing cannot be For God can neuer be but God Wherefore he can not be conuerted into man but he may well vnite man to him selfe as he hath done in the person of his sonne Iesus Christ In likewise man can not be conuerted into God forsomuch as he is a creature that God which is the creator of all cannot be created but is without beginning as he is without end and infinite the which thing can not agree with any creature From whence it foloweth that the Goddes which are created and that haue had any beginning are no Goddes at all but are onely creatures or else illusions And as the substaunce of God cannot be conuerted into that of man nor that of man into that of God for otherwise God should not be God nor man should not be man at all Euen so neyther the one nor the other may be without his conuenient and naturall proprieties For if the humaine nature haue the proprieties belonging to the diuine nature it is no more humaine nature but diuine In like sort if the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ haue the natural proprieties which doe belong to the bread and to the wine as they haue indeed if they haue their qualities accidents these same effects they are not at all the body and the bloud of him but bread and wine remayning alwaies in their substance with their accidents Chapter v. That the doctrine of transsubstanciatiō doth ouerthrow a great parte of the Articles of the faith and Christian religion concerning the worke of the redemptiō wrought by Iesus Christ THen euen as the transsubstanciators doe abolish from the supper the true signes of the same by their transsubstanciation euen so doe they take away the thinges signified by them to wit the body and bloud of Iesus Christ in asmuch as they transfigure them into an other nature spoyling them of their bodyly proprieties in such sort that they are no more a very body nor a very bloud forsomuch as they haue not their naturall proprieties but haue those of the bread and of the wine which should represent them and should not be the thing it selfe the which they should signifie And by the same ineane they ouerthrowe all the Articles of our faith touching the incarnation of Iesus Christ and his conception and natiuitie his death resurrection and ascension into heauen for if he haue such a body as they attribute vnto him in their masse and supper it is not a true humayne body in asmuch as it hath no thing at all of that which is required in a true humayne body but onely that which is proper and naturall to the bread if it be so that the bread be conuerted into the same From whence it foloweth nyther that it is not the same very body which was conceyued and borne of the virgine Mary and which died rose againe and went vp into heauen or else if it be the same very body it was neuer a true body neyther in the conception and natiuitie nor in the death resurrection and ascension or else it was afterwarde chaunged eyther into an imaginatiue body or into a spirite or into God in sort that it is become infinite as God and that it is euery where in his proper essence and substance as God or at the least that it is in many places at one instaunt and that it hath no one qualitie nor quantitie agreeable to a humayne bodie The which things can in no wise agree with the nature of a true body And that which I do say of the doctrine of the transsubstanciators may be also said of that of the consubstanciators who albeit they doe condenme transsubstanciation as we do yet for al that they doe constitute a corporall presence of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ with the bread and with the wine in the supper which is not greatly different from that of the transsubstanciators and draweth after it as many absurdities concerning the proprieties of the humaine nature of Iesus Christ Chapter vi That the doctrine aswell of the transsubstanciators as also of the consubstanciators hath no certayne foundation vpon the wordes of Iesus Christ and for what causes and of the chiefe different which is betweene them and vs touching the presence of Iesus Christ in the Supper IT may not then bee that the transsubstantiatours nor also the cōsubstantiacors may bragge and glorye as they do that they haue the expressed worde of Iesus Christe who sayd This is my body and that their faith of transsubstantiation or consubstantiation is grounded vpon the expressed and certaine worde of god For seeing that their faith doth ouerthrowe the true faith of the principall articles of the Christian doctrine and religion which are very plaine throughly certaine it followeth then in deede that it can not be a true faith as touching that point and by consequent it cannot bee builded vpon the word of god For they may not bragge to haue it in their fauour if they do not take it in his true sense without the which it is no more the worde of God but it is disguised and ouerthrowen Now it appeareth euidently that it is taken in an other then his owne true sense when it is taken in such a sense as ouerthroweth the principal articles of the Christian faith which are not grounded vpon any passage of the holy scriptures that is not well vnderstoode but vpon so many testimonies of the Prophetes and of the Apostles and so plaine and euident that there may remaine no ambiguitie or doubt to those which do beleeue the diuine letters The which thing can not bee saide of the doctrine of transsubstantiation nor of consubstantiation which haue no other ground but vpon a wrong and euill vnderstanding exposition of the wordes of Iesus Christe the which doth plainely and manifestly appeare to bee contrary to the true sense of the same for so much as it is impossible to agree it
of substance where there is chaunge Wherefore there is as great difference betwene chaunge transsubstanciation as is betwene the general the speciall For chaunge is the generall which comprehendeth vnder it transsubstanciation but transsubstanciation doth not comprehend in it chaunge forsomuch as his signifiration is more ample as that of chaunge of transmutation and of conuersion then that of transsubstanciation For all these names do cōprehend other kindes of chaunge and of conuersion then of one substance into an other For as there is chaunge of substances so is there also chaunge of accidents to witte of qualities of time of places of habits and such other like thinges according to their natures and to the predicaments vnder that which they are comprehended as the Logicians distinguish them Our regeneration is not without chaunge which is wrought in our own persōs But it is not at all by conuersion of the substance of our bodies nor of our soules into others or into any other substance but it is in qualitie which is from vice into vertue by the chaunge renewing of the olde Adam of the olde man into the new And therfore if there be any chaūge in the supper touching the matter of the signes thereof it must then be considered of what kind this chaunge is and in what predicament it must be sought if we will speake as becōmeth Logicians and if there be chaunges either of substance or of qualitie in asmuch as the matter of the signes thereof is otherwise qualified when it is applied to that vse then it was before I haue alreadie declared proued that there can be no more chaunge of one substance into an other then there is in all other sacraments because of the reasons that I haue alreadie alleadged taken aswell of the nature of them as of the testimonies of the word of God whereupon they are grounded And if there were such a chaunge it must needes be that it should be in 2. sortes to witte the one by the which the bread and the wine should be appointed to be the signes of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ and the other to conuert the substance of the bread and of the wine into his body and bloud after that they should haue bene made the signes thereof by the first consecration and by the first chaunge which should haue bene made by the same And by this meane it would come to passe that there should be 2. consecratiōs and 2. sorts of sacramental words The first to consecrat cause the bread the wine to be the signes and then the second to conuert them afterward into the bodie and into the bloud of Iesus Christ or else it must be that the same very woordes should do both at one instant And if the same myght be done in the supper there is no reason why it should not be done also in the other sacraments for the reasons which I haue alreadie declared and chiefely in those in the which the holy Ghost hath vsed like maners of speach as in the supper Note We say thē that there is no more chaunge of the substance of the signes thereof then there is in those of the other sacramēts that there is none other at al but in the vse which cōsisteth in this that the matter which is taken for the signes of the sacraments is applied and serueth to another vse and an other end then his did before that time And if there be none other chaunge in the supper of the Lord there can then be none other in the masse if it be his true supper And if it be not his true supper it is not then a sacramēt of the Lord but is rather a kind of magike and of sorcerie Chapter xx Of the ground of the errour of transsubstanciation of the absurdities which followe the same and of the application of the sacramental words to those persons which are capablc and what faith there is there required BUt the Romaine doctors hauing not wel vnderstood the meaning nor the maners of speach of the auncient doctors haue taken them for a chaunge of one substance into an other in stead of taking them for the chaunge which is in the vse thereof It is no maruaile at all if they be fallē into that errour seing that they haue so il vnderstood the nature of the sacrament of the supper that not only they haue conuerted it into a sacrifice in their masse but also they haue made it a sacrament of the altar the which they accompt for a sacrament yea when it is out of the vse therof Wherfore seing they know not what the true vse of the supper is no more haue they well vnderstood what was the chaunge of the signes in the same in respect of their proper vse For that cause euen as they haue chaūged their vse into an other wholly newe and straunge by their doctrine and inuention euen so haue they found out an other newe sort of chaunge of the substance of the signes of the supper into the substance of the thing signified by them against the doctrine and the vsage of al the auncient Church This ignorance and newe inuention hath beene the cause of great and filthie errours and abuses of the transsubstanciation and of the infinite absurdities that the same draweth after it We must then first note Note in what sort the word is adioyned to the matter of the signes to know in what sort the same is dedicated and consecrated to that vse by the same word according to that which I haue lately alleadged of Saint Augustine saying The word is ioyned to the element and it is made a sacrament And then we must goe on further to consider howe the same worde is applied to the persons to whom the sacraments are administred and for whose cause the matter of the signes and of the sacraments is dedicated and consecrated to that vse whereunto it serueth For if the word were not ioyned and applied but onely to the matter of the signes the which Saint Augustine calleth element because it is taken of these earthly elements it should not be conuerted into a sacramēt by the conuersion of the vse whereunto it is conuerted but should alway remaine in his first qualitie should not be qualified as it is when that it is applied to the vse of the sacraments For God hath not giuē the word to man to declare the same to insensible creatures Note to pronounce it ouer thē For that belōgeth to magiciās forcerers charmers and enchaunters which doe abuse it cōtrary to the true vse therof For it is their custome so to applie their charmes enchantmēts to pronounce thē secretly with a whispering voice to babble mumble thē without vnderstanding as also Esay doth witnesse And therefore Saint Augustine sayeth yet very well that the element is made a sacrament by the word which
is compared to the stocke of the vine and his disciples to the braunches ioyned to the stocke and they which are not at al graffed nor ioyned together with him are cōpared to the braunches that are cut off from the stocke And therefore that this benefit is represented and communicated vnto vs by Baptisme and howe wee doe put off the olde man and put on the newe Saint Paul saieth that by Baptisme wee are dead and buried with Iesus Christ into his death and risen againe with him and planted and graffed and incorporated into him and that all those which are baptized haue put on Iesus Christ And thus much concerning the benefite of regeneratiō and of baptisme which is the Sacrament and testimonie thereof whereby the Lorde witnesseth vnto vs howe that he doeth renewe and regenerate vs in his sonne Iesus Christe into a newe life and doth refourme vs to his image by the vertue of his holy spirite and doth adopte vs by the spirit of adoption and doth aduowe and receiue vs for his children into his house which is his Church For the which cause we are baptized in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost Thus much concerning the nature and faults and very apparant to those which vnderstand what sacraments are and doe knowe the nature of them and also that of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ and of the vnion and the distinction of his diuine humaine natures in the person of him The first is touching the maner of expounding the sacramentall wordes of the supper The 2. concerning the signes of the same and the abolishing of them The 3. cōcerning the thinges that they signifie For the first they giue to the sacramentall woordes by Iesus Christ pronounced in the Supper an exposition altogether newe and strange which cannot in any wise agree with any kind of sacramētal speach that is in al the holy scripture like vnto that which Iesus Christ hath vsed in the Supper For first of a sacramentall proposition they wil make a natural proposition By meane whereof they haue already ouerthrowne the nature of the Sacraments For if I say of the bread of the Supper This bread is the body of Christ there is no apparance to take it naturally so as when I say Iesus Christ is man and Iesus Christ is God but this proposition must be taken sacramentally forsomuch as we must alwaies take the signification of the termes wordes which men doe vse according to the matter whereof men speake the nature of the same Wherfore if mē speake of natural things the wordes must be taken naturally but if men speake of spirituall and sacramentall thinges they must be vnderstoode spiritually and sacramentally If there be then sundry sortes of sacramental speaches in the scripture like to that which Iesus Christ did vse in the Supper there is no reason to take them in one sense in some sacraments and in an other cleane contrary in some others for so much as the matter is alwaies sacramentall and the maners of speache alwaies like And on the other side it is a great fault to take the wordes in their proper and naturall signification when they should be vnderstoode by figure and that the meaning of them cannot be true otherwise as they ought to bee vnderstoode chiefly for two causes in the speache of Iesus Christ in the Supper which woordes are at this day in controuersie The first is because that al other maners of sacramental speaches like vnto this may not be otherwise vnderstoode nor also diuers others which resemble them The other is that if they be expounded otherwise there followe infinite absurdities the which do sufficiently declare that such an exposition may not agree with the meaning of the wordes of the Lorde And that which more is on which side soeuer the transsubstantiatours their adherentes may turne them selues they can neuer in any wise expounde these woordes according to the very sense that they would giue them but that they will bee constrayned to acknowledge and receyue some figure as I haue very amply declared all these matters in diuers other bookes I say further also that they shall not bee able to finde in all the holy Scriptures any maner of speach which carieth with it transsubstanciation and conuersion of one substance into an other like to that that Iesus Christ hath vsed in his supper Wherfore is it then that they will here disguise and transsorme the language of the holy Ghost by a new exposition whereof they haue neither testimonie nor example in the whole scriptures namely in the matter of sacraments where they haue many to the contrarie For albeit they say they will take the wordes of Iesus Christe simply and according to the letter Yet for all that they doe it not when they doe expounde the meaning of them according to their doctrine For Iesus Christe hath not spoken that which they say by their exposition Chapter ii Of the abolishing of the signes of the Supper and of the things signified by them and consequently of all the sacrament by the Romaine Transsubstanciation THe other fault which is cōcerning the signes confisteth in that that by their exposition whereby they would establish transsubstanciation they doe abolish the material signes of the supper conuerting them into the thing which they signifie or at least they do confounde them both together whereas they should be distinguished the one from the other For euen as a sacrament cannot be a true sacrament without the woord of God no more can it be without material signes which are ioyned to that word as seales thereof Now if the substance of bread and wine were transsubstanciate and conuerted into that of the body and of the bloud of Iesus Christ there should be there no more bread nor wine by consequent there should be no more materiall signes forasmuch as there is none other but the bread and the wine From whence it should also folowe that there should be at all no sacrament And so willing to conuert the signes into the thing which they signifie they haue neyther the one nor the other For in abolishing the signes they abolish also the thyng which should be signified by them For it can not bee there offered nor communicated sacramentally as it ought to be set foorth and communicated if the meanes be taken awaye which the Lord hath ordayned to make vs partakers thereof And for to alleadge that the signes doe alwaies remayne signes albeit that they be conuerted into the thing which they should signifie because that their accidents do alwayes remaine whole the which do there remayne for signes that is not to satisfie the question and the difficultie but to make it yet greater For as the accidents may not be without substaunce no more may they be accidentes of substances if they be not agreeable to their
either with the other maners of sacramentall speache of the scriptures and with their liuely signification and exposition or els with the nature as well of the sacramentes as of the true bodie of Iesus Christe or of all those articles of the faith whereof I haue now made mention For the exposition which in matter of sacramētes can not agree with all those points may not be true On the contrary that which disagreeth not at all but doth very well agree with all these pointes may in no wyse be reiected as false Now we saye that the same of ours doth agree with them very well in as much as it agreeth with all other the like passages of the scriptures and like maners of sacramentall and figuratiue speaches and with the natures of the sacramentes and of the signes of them and with that of the body and of the blood of Iesus Christ and with the articles of our faith For we are not at all in controuersie with the transsubstantiatours nor with the consubstantiators touching the wordes of the Supper whether they be of Iesus Christe and whether they bee true or no and whether hee be present in the Supper or absent and whether his body and his blood be there present and distributed and communicated or no for wee all agree in all these poyntes But the different is onely in the maner of the presence and communication to witte whether it bee bodily or spiritually and whether the body and the bloud of Iesus Christ be there distributed and eaten and drunken bodily and naturally or els spiritually and suppernaturally We saye that it is spiritually and supernaturally by meane of the reasons which I haue already alleadged the other saye that it is bodily and naturally which thing wee can not graunt them if wee will not foorthwith graunt them al the absurdities whereof I haue made mencion and a great nomber of other which folowe their doctrine Chapter vii Of the adoration of the bread and of the wine as well in the Masse as in their pixtes and boxes and of the idolatric that therein is SO much touching the errour of transsubstantiation from whence there followeth yet an other very great very vnsufferable the which I set downe for the seconde concerning the matter of transsubstantiation and for the seuenth of the twelue into which nomber I bring all the poyntes This same is concerning the worshipping of the bread and of the wine in stead of Iesus Christ the very sonne of God This is an errour which yet draweth after it many other The first is that where the bread the wine should be distributed in the masse to those which be there present as the Lorde hath commaunded that it should be done in the supper they doe onely set them out to shewe lifting them vp on high and causing them to bee worshipped of euery one as idols through great superstition and idolatrie whose like neuer was since the beginning of the world howe great soeuer the blindnesse haue bene For as Cicero himselfe witnesseth there were neuer men that did beleeue or thinke that that which they did eate was god And there was neuer any people so beastly which did thinke that the idols the visible things which they did honour and worship were really and essentially gods but onely that they were remembrances and representations But the idolatrie whereof I now speake passeth on much further For it contenteth not it self to cause the bread and the wine to be worshipped and honoured as holy sacred signes ordeined to be remembrances and representations of the very body blood of Iesus Christ but as Iesus Christ him selfe in fleshe and bone and man and God together For they affirme that there is no more bread nor wine but that that which was bread and wine before the consecration is really and in deede Iesus Christe him selfe which thing may not be by meane of the reasons which I haue already alleadged From whence it followeth that the bread and the wine are there worshipped for gods that that same worshipping is a very idolatrie and cleane contrary to the holy ordinaunce of the Lorde and to that which he hath sayd and done and commaunded in the institution and administration of the same For he commandeth expresly to doe that which he did in the remembrance of him and not otherwise Nowe hauing taken the bread the wine hee did not lift them vp on high nor caused them to be worshipped by his disciples before he did distribute them but did distribute them to euery of thē with expresse commandement that they should take both the one and the other euen at the same very time that they shoulde eate the bread and drinke the wine euen as they did in deede And if this can not be proued to be done neither in their masse nor in the very supper which they do administer to the people there is thē lesser reason to reserue the bread in pixtes caskets cupbordes and such like not onely to cause it to bee worshipped as God or to beare it about in procession in great pompe and solemnitie to that very ende as the Persians did beare in time past their sacred fire but also to coniure the time the tempestes and the Deuils and to vse them in such like superstitions according as it falleth in their fantasie For as I haue already heretofore shewed albeit that it were so that according to their doctrine of transsubstantiation the bread were chaunged into the bodie of Iesus Christe yet for all that it coulde not haue place out of the vse of the Sacrament by meane of the reasons that I haue already yelded Nowe it is very true that there is no vse there where the Sacrament is not administred and that it is not administred there where it is not distributed with the woorde to those which are capable of it And if they doe applie the signes thereof to any other vse then to the same for the which they are ordeyned that vse is not lawfull wherefore it may not bee taken for an vse but shoulde bee reiected as an abuse manifestly contrary to the woorde and ordinaunce of the Lorde And on the other syde if this abuse were not so great yet so is it for all that that this worshipping of the bread and of the wyne and of their holy hostie can not bee without putting them alwaye which doe worshippe them in great daunger of Idolatrie At the least it can not bee done in fayth Note for so much as it must needes bee that the worshippers remayne alwaye in doubt touching the consecration of the priestes for so much as according to their doctrine there is no transsubstantiation if the intent to consecrate be not ioyned with the pronunciation of the woordes and that there is no man that can iudge and bee assured of the purpose of the priestes