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
will they â—oue this first sacrifice which they terme not blouddy vpon the which we are in controuersie with them and of the which they say that they â—e sacrificers and successors of Iesus Christ in 〈◊〉 behalfe For we doe not disagree with theÌ„â—t all as touching the second And concerning â—â—e first wee will not make any difficultie to â—â—aunt them that the auncient doctors of the â—hurch and the auncient Church which foloâ—ed their doctrine haue indeede called the saâ—â—â—â—eÌ„t of the supper sacrifice in that sense that the holy Scripture calleth the same name the woorke of the preaching of the Gospel by the which the true ministers thereof bring men vnto God as though they did offer men vnto him and as it doth call also the mortification of the Christians whereby they offer them selues vnto God for liuing and reasonable sacrifices and in like sort the praiers thanks giuing the almes because that al these things were done auncieÌ„tly in the supper For it was not celebrated without the preaching of the word of God nor without praiers and thankes giuing from whence it hath had the name of Eucharistie among the Greekes nor without almes and gathering and such other like good workes the which God accepteth for sacrifices But these are not at al propiciatory sacrifices for the remission of sinnes the redemption of soules but are sacrifices of praise and thankes giuing For the Christian Church doth not acknowledge any other sacâ—â—â—fice propiciatorie but onely that which Iesuâ— Christ him selfe did offer in his owne person â–ª not wheÌ„ he did iustitute and administer the supper but wheÌ„ he suffered for vs and namely inhâ—â— he died for our sinnes For al his life was a peâ—â—petuall sacrifice but wee take him chiefly in hiâ— death because that it was therein ended as 〈◊〉 him selfe did witnesse vpon the crosse Then whâ— the auncients did call the sacrament of the suâ—per a sacrifice not bloudy they toke it in the seÌ„se that I haue already declared that the Supper was a sacrifice of praise thankes giuing they haue also called it so because that they haue ofteÌ„ times taken the name of sacrifice for that which we do call diuine seruice praier forsomuch as al the parts therof al the things therein required are comprised in the celebration of the Supper in that same maner as it was instituted by Iesus Christ and celebrated by the Apostles and by the true auncient Church For according to the testimony of Saint Luke the first Christian Church had foure thinges in singular recoÌ„meÌ„dation in their assemblies The first was the praiers and then the doctrine of the Apostles and the thied breaking of bread and the fourth the communion by the which two latter wee must vnderstand the administration and distriâ—â—tioÌ„ of the Supper and the gatherings for the â—oore the distributioÌ„s which were made vnto â—hem When then the auncients do call the supâ—er sacrifice and that they doe make mencion of sacrifice not bloudy they vse it in that sense that haue already declared as it appeareth plainâ—â— by their owne testimony Wherefore we wil â—â—t make any great difficulty to graunt that the â—upper was a sacrifice in that sense to wit a â—acrifice of praise and thankes giuing 〈◊〉 not a Sacrifice propiciatorie for the remission of sinnes the redemption of soules in such sorte as the Romaine catholiques do affirme their masse to be into the which they haue conuerted the supper of the Lorde Chapter xii Of the trumperies of the doctors of the Romayne Church concerning the name of sacrifice and the vse thereof and chiefly of the confusion which they put betwene the sacrifice propiciatorie and Eucharistique and betweene sacrament and sacrifice and of the differeÌ„ce that must be put betwene the one and the other WHereupon it is needful that euery man he warned of 2. trumperies by the which the Romayne doctors do deceyue the ignorant aâ—using the name of sacrifice and of the authoritie and testimonie of the auncient doctors of the Church in this matter The first is in the confusion that they make betwene the sacrifices The other in that they take the name of sacrifice in the writings of the auncient doctors for the masse such as it is in the Romayne Church For first they do take for sacrifice propitiatorie that which the auncient Doctors did take for sacrifice 〈◊〉 praise and thanks giuing and for a commemâ—â—ration of the death of Iesus Christe the whiâ—â— for the same cause men may call Eucharistique euen as some men do call it to giue men the better to vnderstand this difference as men doe cal the Supper Eucharistie for the same cause For the which cause they haue called the Supper sacrifice not blouddy to giue to vnderstande that they did not meane to offer Iesus Christ to God in sacrifice in the same for the remission of sinnes and the redemption of soules for somuch as the same cannot be done but by the very and onely sonne of God Iesus Christe nor without the shedding of his bloud but onely for a coÌ„memoration of the propiciatory sacrifice that which Iesus Christ him selfe did offer of his owne body bloud to yeeld him praise and thankes For they did knowe very wel what difference there is betwene sacrament and sacrifice and that the supper was not instituted by the Lorde for a sacrifice but for a Sacrament For in a sacrifice which is offered for the remission of sinnes and the redemption of soules it behoueth that the man offer vnto God the thing which he sacrificeth vnto him and that it be sufficient to appease â—is wrath or otherwise the sacrifice is not perâ—ect neither may it satisfie god And therefore it was that al those of the Leuits which were â—rdayned in the lawe to represent that of Iesus Christ did cease to giue place to him only But â—e sacraments are ordayned not at all to offer any thing to god for the remission of sinnes but on the contrary to receiue of him the spiritual and heauenly good things which he offreth communicateth vnto vs by the same And therefore Iesus Christ did not offer vnto God eyther the bread or the wine of the Supper or yet his body and his bloud in the same but did offer and communicate them both to wit the signes and the things signified by them to his disciples distributing bodily vnto them that which was bodyly and earthly sptritually that which was spiritual and heauenly And therefore he said Take ye and eate ye and drinke ye the which woordes he did not addresse vnto â–ª God nor consequently the bread and the wine which he commanded to eate and to drinke neither his body nor his bloud signified by the same but to his disciples and consequently to al those vnto whom the supper is administred according to his ordinance And therefore when Iesus Christ sayd
be not in superstion and idolatrie Wherefore if at that very time that they haue good pastors which doe set foorth purely vnto them the doctrine of the Lorde and doe solicite them thereby to do their dutie they are yet very colde and slowe we may not maruell then if when they want that doctrine they haue litle care both for the Supper and Communiō and for all other diuine seruice The third is that albeit that they were the best affected of the world to the religion yet for all that they could not furnished and accomplishe so many Suppers and so often and in so many diuers times and places as the priestes doe ordinarily saye Masses Wherefore it must needes be either that they do saye fewer and to better purpose or els that they doe administer their supper and communion all alone as they daily do Behold then how the true vse of the true supper of the Lorde was lost by the meane of masses and was conuerted into the particular priuate cōmuniō and suppers of the priests which are neither suppers nor communions as I haue already sufficiently proued heretofore Chapter .x. Whether men may cōmunicate spiritually at the Supper by the meane of those which doe there communicate bodily without communicating there with thē and whether the one may receiue the Sacraments better for the other then he may heare the preaching and beleeue and be saued the one for the other THere resteth yet to aunswere nowe to that which they saye that albeit that those which assist at the masse doe not communicate at all bodily at the communion which the priest receiueth in the same yet for all that the same letteth not but that they may cōmunicate spiritually But I aske them if the meanes which the Lord hath ordeined for to communicate vnto vs his giftes and graces doe serue for nothing to that for the which he hath ordeined them and whether it be all one either to vse them or not to vse them at all For if they be there of no value they are ordeined in vaine the which thing shoulde very euill agree with the wisdome and prouidence of the almighty which doth make and ordaine nothing without very good iust cause And if it be so they which doe contemne these meanes do tempt God are rebels vnto him in as much as they do not obey his ordinance in so doing they make them selues vnworthy depriue them selues of the benefites which God would cōmunicate vnto them by those meanes For albeit that he is able to communicate them without those meanes Note and tha he is not thereunto subiect at all yet for all that seeing that he will cōmunicate thē in that sort vnto vs he hath made vs subiect to that order Wherefore if we do contemn and violate them we do make our selues vnworthy incapable of the good things which hee would bestow vpon vs by the same the fruite whereof we can not receiue if we our our selues do not enioy possesse the same in our own very persons not by vicars lieutenāts For there is no mā that may possesse thē nor enioy and receiue the fruite of thē for others but euery man for him selfe onely For the which cause it must also be that whosoeuer wil be made partaker must vse in his own person those meanes by the which the Lord doth communicate them and not an other for him as wee may well iudge by the preaching of the Gospel and by the doctrine set forth vnto vs in the same For seeing that faith is giuen by the hearing of the woorde of God I must if I will receiue this gift of faith heare the worde by hearing whereof the holy Ghost will worke in me and make me partaker for seeing that the Lorde hath so ordeined it if I reiect the preaching of the woorde I depriue my selfe of the faith which I shoulde receiue by the same And therefore Saint Paul saith How shall they belleeue in him whom they haue not heard and how shall they heare without a preacher euen then as an other may not beleeue for me and as I can not be saued by the faith of an other whatsoeuer he be if I my self doe not beleeue in proper person euē so none other may heare the Gospell for me in such sorte that it may profite me if I my selfe doe not heare it in mine own person For faith is in respect of the soule and of the spirituall life as the soule is in respect of the body and of the corporall life wherefore euen as no man may liue a corporall life by meane of the soule of an other man but onely by his own euen so no man may liue a spirituall life by the faith of an other but by his owne faith according to that which is written The iust man shal liue by faith And euen as no man may entertain and conserue the life which hee receiued by meane of his soule by the nouriture which an other doth take nor by that which he eateth and drinketh but onely by that which he him selfe doth take and by the meates and drinkes which he receiueth by his owne preson euen so is it of the nouriture of the faith of euery man by the word of God for the entertainement and conseruatiō of the spirituall life Chapter .xi. Of the agreemēt which is between the signes of the Sacraments and the woorde of the same concerning the instruction of man and of the spirituall communion of them without the bodily in case of necessitie ANd that which I say of preaching and of the worde must be also vnderstoode of the Sacramentes and of the administration of them for so much as they do depend of the same and that they are as Saint Augustine hath very wel said as it were a kinde of worde which is visible and to be felt and is sensible the which teacheth men by their eyes by the meane of the sight and by the other senses by the meane of their feelings as doth the woorde and the voice by the eares by the meane of the hearing From whēce it commeth to passe that by the meane of the sacramentes man is instructed by all his senses as well exteriour as interiour and as well bodily as spirituall because that they haue such as agreement together that the exteriour and bodily senses are as the messengers and the aduertisers of the inward and spiritual senses Wherfore seeing that God would that by the meane of his sacraments that one should helpe to instruct the others euery one in their order and degree none may then contemne and ouerthrowe that order Whereupon I do conclude that the Romaine priests may as wel receiue the supper for others as for them selues as they may heare the word of God beleeue be saued for others for so much as it must needes be that euery man haue all this