to aduenture vpon so great a change in beleefe as this was after so many yeares being a Priest and Catholike Bishopp and offeringe sacrifice after the manner of the Catholike Church from the first day of our contreyes conuersion vnto th' end of K. Henryes raigne His motiues were as yow heare certayne places of the scripture which were only taken out of the Epistle to the Hebrues talkinge of Christs bloudy sacrifice on the crosse which was but one certayne places of the Fathers to witt two or three misvnderstood out of S. Augustine and one out of Fulgentius all which notwithstandinge proue nothinge for his purpose as after yow shall see declared in their place and turne And the selfe same Fathers haue so many other cleere places to the contrary as we will desire no better iudges for proofe of our Catholike cause then yf Ridley would remitt himselfe to these two Fathers iudgements by him cyted against vs for that both of them do professe themselues to be Priests and to offer externall sacrifice vpon the Altar as our Priests do now 27. Consider then how wise and constant a man Ridley was to leaue his ancient faith so generally receaued throughout all Christendome in his dayes and so many yeares practised by himselfe vpon two such motiues as are certayne places of scripture misvnderstood by himselfe and certayne testimonyes of Fathers that seemed to him to haue some difficulty Which Ieuity vvas so displeasaunt vnto almighty God as by the effects we see that wheras at the beginning he seemed to doubt vpon these two motiues leauinge other men to iudge therof he became by little and little to be so obstinately blinded at length therin as albeit some foure or fiue yeares after he were openly conuicted in disputations at Oxford as by his answers yow shall afterwards see yet was he content to burne for the same which was the highest degree of calamity that could fall vpon him in body and soule And thus much of him and his determination for the present Sixt Disputation §. 6. 28. In all the former disputations both at Oxford and Cambridge yow shall find nothinge of friar Martyn Bucer no not so much as that he is once named in all these conflicts about the blessed Sacrament And yet yow must remember that he was principall reader of diuinity in Cambridge at this tyme as Peter Martyr was in Oxford and therfore as the first place was giuen to the said Peter in Oxford so yt is likely that the same would haue byn to Martyn in Cambridge yf they had found him so pliable to their hands in his opinions about the Sacrament as the other was but in no case would he be induced as yet to accommadate himselfe therin and therfore had he not any part allowed him in this comedy eyther of defendant opponent disputer counselour moderator assistant or other office or imployment nay yt is thought that he incurred so great disgrace about this matter as he could willingly haue departed the realme againe as Bernardinus Ochinus vpon such like discontentment did from London had not the necessity of his woman and other impediments of pouerty letted him not knowinge well whither to goe as being expulsed from Argentina at his comming to England as before we haue shewed in the story of his life 29. Wherfore resoluinge himselfe at length to passe ouer this mortification and to giue our English Protestants some satisfaction though not in the points which they desired he thought it good after Ridleyes departure to defend certayne other paradoxes which Fox recordeth in these words Ouer and besides these disputations aboue mentioned other disputations vvere holden in Cambridge shortly after by Martyn Bucer vpon these conclusions followinge First that the canonicall bookes of scripture alone do sufficiently teach the regenerate all things necessary belonginge to saluation Secondly there is no Church on earth that erreth not as well in faith as in manners Thirdly we are so iustified freely of God that before our iustification yt is sinne and prouoketh Gods wrath against vs whatsoeuer good worke we seeme to do Then being iustifyed we do good works 30. These were Bucers conclusions which well I may call paradoxes for that euen in the common sense iudgement of euery meane capacity the falsity and absurdity therof is apparant For as touchinge the first though we graunt that the diuine books of scripture yf they were fewer then they are respectinge Gods holy prouidence are sufficient to teach both regenerate and not regenerate that beleeue the verity therof the true way of saluation and that the said diuine prouidence hath doth and will so prouide that albeit some parts of these we now haue should be lost as diuers others before haue byn yet should the remnant still be sufficient to that purpose with such other supplyes of Gods assistance as he would send yet to say as this man doth that the canonicall bookes of scripture alone do sufficiently teach all things belonginge to saluation yf by alone he will exclude all other helpes of tradition antiquity testimony of the Church interpretation of the Fathers direction of generall Councells and other like aydes yt is a most absurd paradox for neyther can we know which bookes are to be held canonicall nor what they teach truly sincerely nor what may be deduced out of them yf we remoue the former helpes And the case is as yf one of the Kings of our countrey goinge abroad as some did to Hierusalem or other forrayne warres and intending to be longe absent should leaue with his Councellors for their better gouernement certayne lawes wrytten with his owne hand other directions by word of mouth how to proceed interprett and vse them commaunding all men to obay them and that some troublesome people after many yeares continuance in their gouernement should appeale from them to the Kings wrytten lawes only prayinge the sufficiency therof for better colouâ—inge their pretence and suinge that yt were â— blott vnto the said lawes and to the Kings wisdome that made them to acknowledge any insufficiency at all in them for perfect direction of the common welth which lawes â—et themselues would expound as pleased them best for their owne purposes â—1 In this case who seeth not whervnto this practise tendeth and for what causes so great prayses are giuen to the sufficiency of these lawes vsed to make the praisers iudges of all and to exempt them from all controlment of others And the very same is seene in the other case of the scriptures which being written by the spiritt and fingar of God himselfe and deliuered vnto vs by the Church whose commission also and authority in the same scriptures is sett downe byndinge vs vnder dlamnation to heare her from age to age as the pillar and firmament of truth there stepp vp togeather diuers sorts of sectarves in all ages of this of ours Lutherans
in his disputations with diuers of these authorityes answeted I am not a shamed to acknowledge my ignorance and these testimonyes are more then I can beare away and after againe being further pressed with the most euident authorityes of S. Augustine and S. Chrysostome in particular affirminge that the sacrifice of the masse is propitiatory both for quicke and dead he aunswered The Doctors might be deceaued in some points though not in all things I beleeue them when they say vvell And yet further I am of their saith vvhen they say vvell I referre my selfe to my L. of Canterburyes booke vvholy heerin And yet againe I haue said vvhen they say vvell and bringe the scriptures for them I am of their faith And further Augustine requireth not to be beleeued So he And by this yow may see what accompt they make both of S. Augustine and other Fathers notwithstandinge for a shew sometymes they will cyte some places out of them little to the purpose but being witting in their owne consciences that really and substantially they make against them they shift them of finally in this order as yow haue heard and will beleeue and teach only as pleaseth themselues which is the peculiar pride and willfullnes of heresie from which God deliuer vs. And with this I end this whole Treatise FINIS Anno Domini 215. Euseb. l. 6. hist. c. 14. Hier. de vir Illust. in Caio Bed l. 1. hist. c. 14. Const. presbyt in vita S. Lupi episc See the acts of this disputatioÌ„ in Possid l. de vita Aug. c. 3. Aug. epist. 244. S. Austens disputation with Foelix Manichaeus S. Ausren his disputation with the Donatists Breuic collat primi diei Aug. in Breuic Epist. ad Gaudent Acta apud Aug. ep 157. l. 2. Retract c. 51. Possidon in vita Aug. c. 14. Possid ib. cap. 17. S. Augustines disputatioÌ„s vvith the Atrians Aug. epist. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. Photius in Bibliotheca Anastasius hoc anno Beda l. 3. hâ—st cap. 25. Publike disputation refused by S. Ambros. vpon iust causes Ambros. epist. 31. vvhere is extant also the booke sent by Ambrose to Valentinian Paul in vita Ambrosij The comparison betwene Cath hereticall disputations DisputatioÌ„ fitter in some to moue doubts examine the truth then to resolue the same Aug. l. de moribus Ecclesiae contra Manicheos Aug. confess lib. 5. cap. 13. lib. 6. c. 1. 2. 11. VVhat force disputatioÌ„ hath in resoluing matters of faith Act. 15. The manner of proceeding vnder the Apostles The waÌ„t which sectaryes haue to determyne matters by Cicero in Paradox The willfullnes of Foxtan vnlearned sectaryes in disputation * Mensiâ—us Ian Mars Sept Noucmb The story of a Mani hean woman that disputed with a Bishopp Mareus in vita S. Porphirij The cause of the Edition of these disputations First disputation of Peter Martyr at Oxford 1549. Fox pag. 1249. Fox pag. 1115. 1205. See Statue booke an 1. Edvv. 6. cap. 1. Fox pag. 1548. Zuinallanisue admitted 1546. * Sup. Decemb 26. See Doctor Saunders l. 2. de sehi m. Aâ—gl 1. Cor. 11. The dissemblinge of Peter Martyr Bucer Luth. lib. cont Sacrament alibi sapâ— Three questions to be disputed at Oxford 1549. See the defence of the relacioÌ„ of 〈◊〉 his disputation vvith B. Peâ—on of Eureux tom 2 part 3 or our three conuernons Tvvo similitudes to expresse the vayne vvtaÌ„gling of SacrameÌ„taryes about TransubstantiatioÌ„ FrauduleÌ„t dealing of ProtestaÌ„ts in disputation Fox pag. 1249. 2. fraud See aftervvard c. 3. Fox pag. ibid. 3. fraud Sand lâ—b 2. de schism Angl. D. Saunders relation of this disputation at Oxford The secoÌ„d disputation held by D. Ridley in Cambridge Triflinge disputations of our first Protestants Fox pag. 1254. Fox pag. 1255. Fox noteth the disagreement of his ovvne men Ridleyes fond aunsvveringe Fox pag. 1256. The 3. disputation at Cambridge anno Domini 1549. D. Perne confesseth the corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament Fox pag. 1257. Fond arguments of Sacramentaryes Albanus Langlandus in confut Determ Nicol. Ridley The partiall dealinge of ProtestaÌ„ts in their disputations Psalm 115. The 4. disputation at Cambridge 1549. Fox pag. 1257. D. Pearne speaketh doubtfully doubly about the SacrameÌ„t The fond manner of this disputation Fox pag. 1260. Contradiction in Fox his vvords M. Vauesour commended Zuinglius and Oecolampadius doubtfull of their doctrine at the beginninge Fox pag. 1261. The 5. disputation or determination at Cambridge by M. Ridley Fox pag. 1261. Ridley his entrance to his determination Diuers coÌ„sideratioÌ„s about the vncertainty of Protestants beliefe Fiue pretended heades of Ridleyes determination Ridleyes resolution about the sacrifice of the masse Fox pag. 1262. Hebr. 9. 10. The miserable proceeding of Ridley The sixt disputatioÌ„ at Cambridge by Bucer 1549. Martyn Bucer in great distresse * Mense Decemb. cap. 16. Fox pag. 1262 1263. The questions of Bucers disputatio Hovv scriptures are sufficient to saluation A case representinge the heretiks of our dayes about cryinge for scriptures alone Matt. 18. 1 Tim 3. Marc. vlt. Matt. 16. The secoÌ„d paradox of Martyn Bucer Mattâ— 18. 1. Tim. 5. Marc. vlt. Matth. 16. The third paradox of Martyn Bucer Exod. 1. Ezech. 20. Hier. in Comment in cap. 20. Ezech. Dan. 4. Act. 10. Aug. l. de pradestinat sanct cap 7. lib. 1. de Baptis c. 3. l. 4. c. 23. Fox pag. 1263. An altercation betvveene custome verity Auâ— epist. 118. ad Iaâ—uer Custome and verity cannot be at odds in the Christian Church The 7. disputation in the coÌ„nocation house armo 1553. Fox pag. 1284. M. Doctor VVeston prolocutor Fox ibid. Six only of all the coÌ„uocation house refused to subscribe M. Cheiney D. Moreman M. Elmour M. Philpot. Fox pag. 1285. Iohn Philpotis vauÌ„t in the coÌ„uocation house Fox ibid. Three disputatioÌ„s in Oxford against Cranmer Ridley and Latymer Fox pag. â—299 Fox ibid. The indiffereÌ„t dealinge of Cath. in their disputation The foolish reprehentioÌ„ vsed by Cranmer Fox Fox pag. 1326. Fox pag. 1336. The ProtestaÌ„t Ministers excuse them solues froÌ„ disputation The disputation of K. Henry vviâ—h Lambert * Sup â—â—p 14 diâ— 4. Octob. A pretended disputation in the beginninge of Q. Elizabethes raigne anno 1559. The great inequality iniuryes offered in this preteÌ„ded disputation Fox page 1924. Three questions to small purpose Fox pag. 1919. Diuers frauds 1. 2. Fox pag. 1923. col 1. num 1. 3. Three indignityes oâ—â—ered vnto the Bishops D. Colâ— An ostentation of the Protestant side Fox pag. 1922. Open inequality AltercatioÌ„ of the Bishops vvith Syr Nicolas Bacon The resolute speach of D. VVatson B. of Lincolne Another altercatioÌ„ vvith the L. Keeper Stovv anno Domini 1559. The issue of this disputation vvith the Bishops Fox pag. 1297. The inference vpoÌ„ these disputatioÌ„s Ten councells examined confirmed the doctrine of the reall presence Laufrane contra Berengarium * VVald tom 2. de Sacram.
Mary with whome ioyned M. VVhitehead M. Grindall M. Horne M. Sandes M. Ghest M. Elmour and M. Iewell all freshly come from beyond the seas who all except some one or two were soone after for their good demeritts made Bishopps and accommodated by thrustinge out the other in reward of this disputation wherin notwithstanding there was not one argument made nor solution giuen but only an ostentation sought to effectuate that with some colour which otherwise was determined before and lacked but a pretence for that the Queene and those that were nearest about her hauinge determined to make a change of Religion thought they should do yt best and most iustifiable yf they promised some name of disputation wherin the Catholiks had byn satisfied or vanquished to which end there were so many shifts partialityes and diuises vsed and so many iniuryes offered to the Bishops of the Catholike party as they thought good vpon the second dayes meetinge to passe on no further except more reason or indifferency vvere vsed towards them 45. For first in this disputation summoned denounced throughout the whole realme by order of the Queene and Councell Syr Nicolas Bacon lately made Lord Keeper tooke vpon him to be president and cheefe moderator whome all men knew to be one of the greatest aduersaryes to Catholike Religion that was in England violent in condition and vtterly ignorant in matters of diuinity Secondly the questions appointed to be disputed on were not chosen nor assigned by the said Bishopps but by the same Syr Nicolas and his adherents in the name of the Councell at the instance or pleasure of the Protestant new pretenders wherof when the Bishopps complayned the Lord Keeper answered the questions are neyther of their to witt the Protestants propoundinge nor of your diuise but offered indifferently to â—ow both 46. The questions were three first vvhether yt were against Godsword and the custome of the primitiue Church to vse a tongue vnknowne to the people in common prayer and administration of Sacraments The second vvhether euery Church had authority to appoint take away and change ceremonyes and Ecclesiasticall rites so the same be to edification Thirdly whether yt can be proued by the word of God that there is offered vp in the masse a sacrifice propitiatory for the quicke and the dead VVhich questions vvere to be handled saith Fox in the presence of the Queenes Councell Nobility and other of the parlament house for the better satisfaction and enablinge of their iudgements to treat and conclude of such lawes as might depend heerevpon By which words you may easily conceaue what the drift of this pretended disputation was and how guilefully these questions were chosen and sett downe yf yow marke their words and sense especially the former two which only or principally were to be handled and how impertinent these questions were to the great moment of the whole matter and sequele that was to ensue therof which was no lesse then the vniuersall change of the whole body of Catholike Religion throughout the realme 47. This then was the first hereticall fraud in appointinge this disputation and the questions to be disputed but they were many more and greater in the prosecution therof for first the Catholike cleargy lackinge their cheife head which was the Archbishopp of Canterbury lately dead the other Archbishopp of Yorke to witt Doctor Heath was entertayned with feyre words for a time to effectuate with his brethren what the Protestant party of the Conncell should thinke expedient whervpon he being Chancelour yet in name though the effect of his office was giuen to Syr Nicolas Bacon vnder the little of Lord Keeper he was brought into the place of disputation and sate in his roome amongst other Councellours togeather with the Duke of Norfolke other of the nobility as one of them and rather against the Bishops then for them though no doubt the good man meant yt not so then was yt appointed to the said Catholike Bishopps by the Archbishopp in name of the Councell only two dayes before their meetinge at the conference for so complayneth the Bishop of Lincolne in the second dayes meetinge that both they to witt the Bishops should begin to say what they could for themselues the Protestant preachers should answere them And secondly that the conference should be in English and not in Latyn and thirdly that yt should not be by way of arguinge or disputinge but only of speach or readinge yt out of some booke or paper All which three points seeminge indignityes to the Bishopps they complayned greeuously therof at their first publike meetinge which was in VVestminster Church vpon the last of March 1559. being friday and Bishop VVhite of VVinchester being the first to speake for his side said that they were ready to dispute argue but had not their wrytinge ready to be read there but would do it at their next meeting yet for giuinge some satisfaction Doctor Cole extempore alleaged some breife reasons concerninge the former questions or propositions reseruinge the rest vnto their fuller booke or wrytinge 48. But heerevpon presently the Protestant preachers came out with their booke or inuectiue against Latyn seruice fraught with a vayne shew of many allegations Scriptures Fathers Councells and Constitutions of Emperors sounding as it might seeme somewhat to their party though nothing at all in truth yf yow examine them as they ly in Fox himselfe but with this ostentation they sought to get the applause of the people heerby well declared that they had more then two dayes warninge to prepare themselues and albeit when this was done the Bishops offered to refute all the same cleerely at the next metinge yet could they not be heard or permitted as presently we shall shew but that this must needs stand for the whole resolution in the first questioÌ„ And Fox like one of his kind seeketh to preuent the matter in these words The same being reade to witt the wryting of the Protestant party vvith some likelyhood as it seemed that the same was much allow able to the audience certayne of the Bishopps began to say contrary to their former aunswere that they had now much more to say in this matter vvherin although they might vvell haue byn reprehended yet for auoydinge of any more mistakinge and that they should vtter all they had to say yt was ordered that vpon munday followinge the Bishopps should bringe their mynd and reasons in vvryting to the second assertion and to the last also ys they could and first read the same and that done the other part should bring likewise theirs c. 49. Lo heere the indifferency that was vsed the Bishopps are accused of cauillation that they offered to aunswere in wrytinge to the Protestants libell which is not only denyed them but yt is ordayned also that after other two dayes they should bringe in whatsoeuer they haue to say
the propitiatory sacrifice wheras more then 8. or 9. score might haue byn cyted to that effect And finally though Latymer muttered out two or three particular aunswers heere and there sayinge that S. Chrysostome had Emphaticall locutions and the like yet his last rest was sett vpon this that the Doctors might be deceaued in some points though not in all things Wherof Fox well allowinge maketh this scoffinge comment in the margent Doctores legendi sunt cum venia the Doctors are to be read with pardon which can haue no other sense but that eyther we must pardon them when they speake not truth or we must aske pardon of them not to beleeue them when we mislike them for other sense I cannot make of this comentary 27. Doctor Cole replyed is it not a shame for an old man to lye yow say yow are of the old Fathers faith Latymer I am of their faith vvhen they say well I referre my selfe to my Lord of Caterburyes booke wholy herin Doctor Smith Then yow are not of S. Chrysostomes faith nor S. Augustines faith Latymer I haue said vvhen they say vvell and bring scriptures for them I am of their faith and further Augustine requireth not to be beleeued c. Weston Forty yeares gone vvhether could yow haue gone to haue found your doctrine Latym The more cause we haue to thanke God now that hath sent the light into the vvorld Weston The light ney light and lewd preachers c. remember vvhat they haue bin that haue bin the beginners of your doctrine none but a few flyinge Apostataes runninge out of Germany c. remember vvhat they haue bin that haue sett forth the same in this realme a sort of flyinge braines and light heads which vvere neuer constant in any one thinge vvhich vvas well seene in the often alteringe of their communion-booke and turninge their table one day vvest and another day east they gott them a tankerd and one saith I drinke and am thankefull the more ioy of thee saith another c. Yow neuer agreed vvith the â—igurynes of Germanie or vvith your selues your stubburnesse is of vaine glory and vve all see by your owne confession how little cause yow haue to be stubburne your learninge is in feoffers hold the Queenes grace is mercifull if yow vvill returne Latymer Yow shall haue no hope in me to returne And thus ended that disputation 74. And heere Iohn Fox is very angry with Doctor VVeston for this speach and for reuenge therof maketh this note in the margent Blasphemous lyes of Doctor VVeston sittinge in the chaire of pestilence and then presently he maketh the narration of him which before we haue related about Vrge hoc vrge hoc and in the margent he hath this other Notandum vrge hoc quod VVeston vvith his beere-pott in his hand which notwithstandinge is more modest then yf yt had byn a wyne-pott And I maruayle much why the wisdome of Fox should obiect this beer-pott so often eagerly against Doctor VVeston seeing his owne great chaire which is yet kept for a relique of his holines in London by the sisters hath two places made on both sides therof the one for the Candlesticke the other for the ale-pott and nutmegges which Father Fox is said to haue loued well and so do his wrytings also shew yet no Catholike man I thinke hath euer obiected the same vnto him before this as he doth the beer-pott to Doctor VVeston But these are trifles Lett vs passe to more serious considerations The Conclusion with some Considerations theron §. 5. 75. By the re-view then of these three dayes disputations a coniecture may be made how matters did passe then and how they stand at this day betwixt vs and Protestants in these articles of controuersie Yow haue heard before the great vaunts that Doctor Ridley made in his disputations at Cambridge vnder K. Edward how euidently forsooth and apparently the truth stood with him and his fellowes this vpon siue principall grounds and head-springs as he calleth them vvhich are the Maiestie and verity of scriptures the most certaine testimony of the ancient Fathers the definition of a Sacrament the abâ—ominable heresie of Eutiches and the most sure beleese of the article of our faith He ascended vp to heauen B. Cranmer also after that againe in the beginninge of Q. Maryes raigne settinge forth a certayne vauntinge schedell which Fox called a Purgation of Thomas Archbishopp Cranmer hath this chalenge therin I vvith Peter Martyr saith he and other foure or fiue vvhich I shall choose vvill by Gods grace take vpon vs to desend all the doctrine and Religion sett â—orth by our soueraigne Lord K. Edward the sixth to be more pure and accordinge to Gods word then any other that hath bin vsed in England these thousand yeares so that Gods vvord may be iudge and that the reasons and proofes of both parts may be sett out in vvrytinge to the entent as well that all the world may examine and iudge theron as that no man shall start backe from his vvrytingâ— 76. Thus he And now yow haue seene more or lesse by the former disputation how he his fellow Ridley were able to performe their bragges and though yow haue seene them brought to the exigents which before hath appeared yet yf yow will beleeue them or Iohn Fox their Chronicler settinge forth their Acts and Monuments they were so farre of from being conquered as the aduerse part was rather putt to the foyle for that they could say nothinge in effect against them And for example Fox wryteth of Doctor VVeston who most of all other vrged them with many good arguments as yow haue heard that not only he had his Theseus there by him to help him out to witt his beere-pott but moreouer that he said neuer a true word nor made neuer a true conclusion almost in that disputation Which how true or false yt is the reader himselfe may be iudge that hath pervsed ouer the same in this our review And the very like in effect wryteth B Cranmer in a certayne letter of his to the Councell vpon the 23. of Aprill 1554. immediatly after the disputation ended complayninge greatly of the disorder iniquity therin vsed which yet by that we haue examined before out of their owne words I meane set downe in Fox his penne being bent wholy to their fauour there could not be great iniquity or inequality the combatt consistinge in discussinge authorityes of auncient Fathers but yt is the nature of this people as alwayes to be contentious so euer to be clamourous and neuer satisfied except they haue their will but especially to wryte and speake both contemptuously and partially yow shall heare how Malster Ridley relateth the euent of this disputation for that hauinge sett downe his owne disputations and aunswers in the prison and this with the greatest aduantage yow must imagine that he could diuise after much
this is my body c. And so did he beare himselfe in his owne hands vvhich vvas prophesied of Dauid but fulfilled only by Christ in that Supper 81. These are the particularityes vsed by the Fathers for declaring what body they meane and can there be any more effectuall speaches then these but yet harken further Thou must know and hold for most certaine saith S. Cyrill that this vvhich seemeth to be bread is not bread but Christs body though the tast doth iudge it bread And againe the same Father Vnder the forme or shew of bread is giuen to thee the body of Christ vnder the forme or snape of wine is giuen to thee the bloud of Christ c. And S. Chrysostome to the same effect VVe must not beleeue our senses eaysie to be beguiled c. VVe must simply and vvithout all ambyguity beleeue the vvords of Christ sayinge This is my body c. O how many say now adayes I vvould see him I vvould behould his visage his vestments c. But he doth more then this for he giueth himselfe not only to be seene but to be touched also handled and eaten by thee Nor only do the Fathers affirme so asseuerantly that yt is the true naturall body of Christ though yt appeare bread in forme and shape and that we must not beleeue our senses heerin but do deny expressely that yt is bread after the words of consecration wherof yow heard longe discourses before out of S. Ambrose in his books de sacramentis and de initiandis Before the words of consecration it is bread saith he but after consecration de pane sit caro Christi of bread yt is made the flesh of Christ And note the word fit yt is made And againe Before the words of Christ be vttered in the consecration the chalice is full of vvine and vvater but vvhen the vvords of Christ haue vvrought their effect ibi sanguis efficitur qui redemit plebem there is made the bloud that redeemed the people And marke in like manner the word efficitur is made and consider whether any thinge can be spoken more plainly 83. But yet the Fathers cease not heere but do passe much further to inculcate the truth of this matter reprehending sharply all doubt suspition or ambiguity which the weaknesse of our flesh or infection of heresie may suggest in this matter S. Cyrill reasoneth thus VVheras Christ hath said of the bread this is my body vvho vvill dare to doubt therof and vvheras he hath said of the wine this is my bloud vvho vvill doubt or say yt is not his bloud he once turned vvater into vvine in Cana of Galiley by his only will which wine is like vnto bloud and shall vve not thinke him vvorthy to be beleeued vvhen he saith that he hath changed vvine into his bloud So he And S. Ambrose to the same effect Our Lord Iesus Christ doth iestifie vnto vs that we do receaue his body and bloud and may we doubt of his creditt or testimony And the other Saint Cyrill of Alexandria saith to the same effect that in this mystery we should not so much as aske quomodo how yt can be done Iudaicum enim verbum est saith he aeterm supplicij causa For ye is a Iewish word and cause of euerlastinge torment And before them both Saint Hilary left wrytten this exhortation These things saith he that are wrytten lett vs read and those things that vve reade lett vs vnderstand and so vve shall perfectly performe the duty of true saith for that these points vvhich vve affirme of the naturall verity of Christs being in vs. exceptive learne them of Christ himselfe we affirme them wickedly and foolishly c. VVherfore vvheras he saith my sâ—eâ—h is truly meat and my bloud is truly drinke there is no place left to vs of doubting concerning the truth of Christs body bloud for that both by the affirmation of Christ himselfe and by our owne beleefe there is in the Sacrament the flesh truly and the bloud truly of our Sauiour 83. So great S. Hilary and Eusebiuâ— Emissenus bringeth in Christ our Sauiour speakinge in these words For so much as my flesh is truly meat and my bloud is truly drinke leit all doubt fullnes of in fideliâ—y depart for so much as he vvho is the author of the gift is vvittnesse also of the truth therof And S. Leo to the same effect Nothinge at all is to be doubted of the truth of Christâ— body and bloud in the Sacrament c. And those do in vaine aunswere amen when they receaue yt if they dispute against that vvhich is affirmed And finally S. Epâ—pâ—anius concludeth thus He that beleeueth it not to be the very body of Christ in the Sacrament is fallen from grace and saluation 84. And by this we may see the earnestnesse of the Fathers in vrginge the beleefe of Christs true flesh and bloud in the Sacrament But they cease not heere but do preuent and exclude all shifts of Sacramentaryes which by Gods holy spiritt they forsaw euen in those auncient dayes affirminge that not by faith only or in â—igure or image or spiritually alone Christs flesh is to be eaten by vs but really substantially and corporally Not only by faith saith S. Chrysâ—stome but in very deed he maketh vs his body reducing vs as yt were into one masse or substance vvith himselfe And Saint Cyrill Not only by saith and charity are we spiritually conioyned to Christ by his flesh in the Sacrament but corporally also by communication of the same flesh And S. Chrysostome againe Not only by loue but in very deed are we conuerted into his flesh by eatinge the same And Saint Cyrill againe VVe receauinge in the Sacrament corporally and substantially the sonne of God vnited naturally to his Father we are clarified glorified therby and made partakers of his supreme nature Thus they Whervnto for more explication addeth Theophilact VVhen Christ said This is my body he shewed that it vvas his very body in deed and not any figure correspondent thervnto for he said not this is the figure of my body but this is my body by vvhich vvords the bread is transformed by an vnspeakable operation though to vs it seeme still bread And againe in another place Behould that the bread vvhich is eaten by vs in the mysteryes is not only a figuration of Christs flesh but the very flesh indeed for Christ said not that the bread vvhich I shall giue yow is the figure of my flesh but my very flesh indeed for that the bread is transformed by secrett vvords into the flesh And another Father more auncient then he aboue twelue hundred yeares past handlinge those words of Christ This is my body saith It is not the figure of Christs body and bloud vt quidam stupida mente nugati sunt as some blockish