Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	word_n	work_n	writing_n	53	3	8.6163	4	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A68172	The parliament of Chryste auouching and declaring the enacted and receaued trueth of the presence of his bodie and bloode in the blessed Sacrament, and of other articles concerning the same, impugned in a wicked sermon by M. Iuell, collected and seth-furth by Thomas Heskyns Doctour of dyuinitie. Wherein the reader shall fynde all the scripturs co[m]monlie alleaged oute of the newe Testament, touching the B. Sacrament, and some of the olde Testament, plainlie and truely expownded by a nombre of holie learned fathers and doctors.	Heskyns, Thomas.	1566 (1566)	STC 13250; ESTC S119699	1,133,151	826

maie be by this perceaued that the Aduersaries figuratiue speache hath no place as they vnderstande yt in this saing of Chryste But this ys raither to be saied that his interprise in so wresting and abusing of Chrystes woordes ys wicked and detestabele For yf that sense might haue ben here vpon these woordes placed who can doubte that S. Ambrose so often rehersing them wolde not in one place or other haue reported the true sense and saied yt had ben but a signe But forasmoche as in no place he so doeth but continuallie and constantlie saieth yt ys the bodie of Chryst let no man doubte of the trueth of that that he teacheth Consecracion the terme of the Papistes vsed of S. Ambr. seriousâ—ie but embracing that let him flie the feigned figures In these sainges also of S. Ambrose this ys breiflie to be touched with a note that wher the Aduersarie in skorne when he happeneth to speake of this woorde consecracion for the most parte addeth as the Papistes teare yt yet ye perceaue that yt ys vsed of S. Ambrose and not sknorned And howe so euer yt liketh him to dallie and trifle withe that woorde yet S. Ambrose in so weightie a matter dothe vse the woorde seriouslie And if for that he vseth this woorde the Aduersarie will also accompte him for a papist I had leuer be a Papist wiht the one then an heretique with the other But yt ys time to call in an other coople THE THREE AND FIFTETH CHAP. CONTINVeth in the exposition of Chrystes woordes by Gregorie Nissen and S. Hierom. AS a man permitted to come into a councell chambre and admitted through speciall fauoure to talke withe eche of the counselours and haue their senerall aduertisementes howe he shall safelie beare him self in the state that he ys called vnto or as a man desierouse to be resolued in a matter of learning entreth an assembley of learned men and gentlie receaued heareth their seuerall iudgementes vttered with great and full agreement to his full resolucion and contentacion can not be but therwith moche delighted so I trust the reader being as yt were in Godes counsell chambre or in Gods Schoole and hearing the aduertisementes and iudgementes of Gods counselours and learned men so seuerallie and yet so agreablie vttered to his full and perfect resolucion I trust I saie he ys delighted and the more for that all these with whiche he hath conference and yet for a good nombre shall haue be all verie auncient and with in the compasse of sixe hondreth yeares after Chryst Wherfor let vs in Gods name proceade with delight and pleasure to heare the other that remain to be conferred with all for they be as ys saied a good nombre of theÌ„ bothe auncient and learned and though all be not auncient yet all learned and approued Of these auncientes that remain the first ys Gregorie Nissen the brother of S. Basill and therfor in the greke church meet next to folowe him This ys his iudgement in this matter Thus he writeth Qua ex cause panis in co corpore mutatus in diuinam virtutem transiit eadem de causa idem nunc fit Vt enim illic verbi Greg. Nissen anserm catathetico de diuinis sacram Dei gratia sanctum efficit illud corpus cuius firmamentum ex pane constabat ipsum etiam quodammodÃ² panis erat sic panis vt ait Apostolus per verbum Dei orationem sanctificatur non quia comeditur eo progrediens vt Verbi corpus euadat sed statim per verbum in corpus mutatur vt dictum est Ã Verbo Hoc est corpus meum By what cause bread in that bodie chaunged passed into the diuine vertue by the same cause that same thinge ys nowe doen. For as ther the grace of the Sonne of God made that bodie whose substanciall nutriment was of bread and yt also in a maner was bread so also this bread as the Apostle saieth ys sanctisied by the woorde of God and praier not tending to this poinct that bicause yt ys eaten yt ys the bodie of the Sonne of God but that furthwith by the woorde yt ys chaunged into the bodie as yt was saied of the Sonne This ys my bodie By this authour who vndoubtedlie geueth a notable testimonie for the veritie of the Sacrament be ouerthrowen three heresies in the same matter Three heresies ouerthrowen by one saing of Gregor Nissen Of the whiche Luther or at the least the Lutherans did settfurth one which was that the Sacrament was the bodie of Chryst if yt were receaued and to him that receaued yt yt was the bodie of Chryst otherwise yt was not Another ys sett furth bothe by Luther and all the Lutherans and by Oecolampadius and all the Oecolampadians and by this Proclamer whiche ys that the bread and wine be not chaunged into the substance of the bodie and bloode of Chryst of the whiche we haue somwhat at large spoken before The thirde ys settfurth by Carolstadius Oecolampadius and their disciples and also by this Proclamer whiche ys that Chrystes substanciall bodie ys not verilie present in the Sacrament Against these three this authour teacheth vs very good documentes according to that that the catholique Churche now teacheth And nowe for the first that the Lutherans doo teache wher they saie that in the Sacrament ys the bodie of Chryst to him that receaueth the Sacrament otherwise yt ys not the bodie of Chryst this authour hath direct What warrant haue the LutheraÌ„s for this woordes to the contrarie wher he saieth Hic panis sanctificatur per verbum Dei orationem non quia comeditur eo progrediens vt verbi corpus euadat This bread ys sanctified by the woorde of God and praier not tending to this poinct that bicause yt ys eaten therfore yt ys the bodie of the Sonne of God So that yt ys not receauing or not receauing eating or not eating that causeth the presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament Receauing or notreceauing causeth nor presence nor absence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacr. but the power of God with the woorde of Chryst as before ys saied The cause of so great a worke as to make present the bodie of Chryst dependeth not of so simple and weake cause as the will of man whiche yt should dooe if yt should depende vpon the receipte For yf the man wolde receaue yt then were yt the bodie of Chryste yf he wolde not receaue yt were not the bodie of Chryst so willing and not willing shoulde make bodie or no bodie after that fonde opinion But to adde somwhat beside the authoritie of this auncient Father which ys more then sufficient to conuince so vain and foolish an heresie what apparance haue they of anie scripture or holie writer For substanciall grownde in ame of them both they haue none to make some shewe or counteinance for the maintenance of their heresie yt ys certen that they haue

healthe in the remembrance of our Lordes passion suffred for vs. Whiche thing when yt ys brought by the handes of men to that visible forme yt ys not sanctified that yt maie be so great a Sacrament but by the Spirite of God woorking inuisiblie Hitherto sainct Augustin Of whome ye see that we are taught that thoug Chryst be by diuerse meanes settfurth and preached as by scriptures preachinges and by the Sacrament yet these thinges be not all of like degree For ther ys none of these called the bodie of Chryst but onelie the bread that ys consecrated by the mysticall praier that ys by the woordes of Chryst Thys ys my bodie that onelie ys called the bodie of Chryste Oecolamp craftilie abuseth S. Augustin Nowe Oecolampadius wolde that bicause sainct Augustin saieth that Chryst ys preached by scripture woorde and Sacrament that these three be of one sorte no more being in the Sacrament then in the other two But note I praie thee gentle reader howe he abuseth sainct Augustin to proue that hys wicked sainge Of this place of sainct Augustin nowe alleadged he taketh onely thus moche Paule might by signifieng preache our Lorde Iesus Chryst otherwise by hys toung otherwise by epistle otherwise by the Sacrament of his bodie and blood And vpon thys he growndeth hys argument and wolde be seen well to haue confirmed Not toung nor writing nor soche other shewing furth Chryst be called his bodie but bread and wine consetrated hys doctrine But all the rest of sainct Augustines woordes whiche folowe whiche ouerthrowe all his building he craftelie lefte oute For yt foloweth Yet doe we call neither his toung neither his epistle nor his writinges the bodie of Chryste but onely we call that the bodie of Chryste that ys taken of the fruictes of the earth and ys by the mysticall prayer consecrated that doe we call the bodie of Chryst All thys doth he leaue oute Soche was the synceritie of the man in alleaging the holie Fathers So good ys the cause that he defended that the doctours muste be mutilated and brought oute in peice meall or ells yt coulde not stand Ys yt not merueilouse that he coulde bring this place of sainct Augustin whiche although the first peice taken alone seemeth somwhat to sownde to his pourpose yet the wholl taken together ys alltogether against him Alas that euer anie man wolde so deceaue the people of God and by soche frawde and abuse of the holie writers make them to embrace erroure in stead of trueth weigh the place throughlie and yowe shall perceaue howe yt mainteineth the catholique trueth of the presence of Chrystes boin the Sacrament verie moch Ye haue nowe heard that neither the worde written nor the woorde spoken though Chryst be preached by them be called the bodie of Chryst but onely the Sacrament ys called the bodie of Chryst And why yt ys called the bodie of Chryste he declareth Not bicause saieth he by the handes of man yt ys brought to be a visible forme but bicause yt ys sanctified and made so great a Sacrament by the inuisible woorking of the holie Goste Note these two poinctes that S. Augustine saieth that the bread ys sanctified and made so great a Sacrament And again that he saieth yt ys so sanctified and made by the inuisible worke of the holie Goste Ther ys great difference betwixt the sanctificacion of the Sacrament yt self and the soule of man that receaueth the Sacrament Now Oecolampadius and Cranmer saie that the Sacramentes being dumbe Oecolamp and Cranmer their heresies creatures receaue no sanctificacion but onely the sowles of men They saie also that the holie Gost woorketh not in the thinges that be the Sacramentes but in the men that receaue the SacrameÌ„tes Thys they saie bicause they wolde auoid the presence of Chryste in the Sacrament which ys made ther present by sanctificacion of the bread But against these their saings S. Augustin saieth that the same bread that ys made by the handes of men ys sanctified S. Augustin plain against Oecolamp aÌ„d Cranmer and receauing sanctitie ys made so great a Sacrament Against them also he saieth that the holie Goste woorketh inuisiblie in the bread I wolde now learn of the Aduersaries what S. Augustine meneth by calling the SacrameÌ„t so great a Sacrament and what worke yt ys that the holie Goste woorketh inuisiblie in the bread The woorkes of the holy Gost be no trifles Yt ys great and miraculouse that he woorketh And what he woorketh S. Iames in his Masse S. Basill also and Chrysostom in their Masses by their humble praiers doe declare S. Iames thus Spiritum tuum sanctissimum demitte nunc Domine in nos in haec sancta dona proposita vt superueniens sancta bona gloriosa sua praesentia sanctificet Diuus Iac. in Missa efficiat hunc panem corpus sanctum Christi tui calicem hunc preciosum sanguinem Christi tui Sende downe now o Lord thy most holie Spirit vpon vs and vpon these holie giftes settfurth that he coming ouer them maie with his holy good and gloriouse presence sanctifie and make this bread the holie bodie of thy Chryst aÌ„d this cuppe the preciouse blood of thy Chryst Thus S. Iames. S. Basill and Chrysostome haue the like woordes See ye not nowe then howe the bread ys sanctiâ—ied See ye not what ys the worke of the holie Goste Perceaue ye not howe that S. Augustine vpoÌ„ good cause called the Sacrament so great a Sacrament ys yt not a great Sacrament Bread sanctified contrarie to Cranmers assertion aÌ„d Oecolamp in which by worke of the holie Gost ys made present the bodie of Chryst To haue hidden this trueth Oecolampadius by peice meall brought in S. Augustine But now ye haue seen the catholique faith well testified the falshead of the Aduersaries detected and to return to oure matter and to conclude ye perceaue this Sacrament by mystical praier which ys by Chrystes woordes to be consecrated the effecte of which consecracion being the bodie of Chryste as ys saied the woordes must nedes be taken without figuratiue sense Thus if my iudgement faill me not ye haue hearde two other noble men of Chrystes schoole and Parliament house very plainlie testifieng the enacted trueth of the vnderstanding of Chrystes wordes yea so plainly that yt caÌ„not but moch confirme the good Chrystian and confute the Pheudochristian But to go forwarde I will ende with these two and call other two THE FIVE AND FIFTETH CHAPITER tarieth in the exposition of the same woordes by Chrysostom and Sedulius NOw among the learned Fathers of the greke church we are descended to Chrysostome of whome I maie saie as besore ys saied of S. Ambrose that he ys so full of godlie testimonies testisieng to vs the true vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes that as I knowe not whiche of them first to take so doe I merueill that they being so manie the Proclamer coulde for shame saie

holie scripturs he reprehended them imagining coÌ„tradictioÌ„s in theÌ„ he reputed theÌ„ saith Niceph. as things of naugh to yowe conteÌ„ne the learned coÌ„mentaries aÌ„d writings of the Saincts of God vpoÌ„ the scripturs aÌ„d matters incideÌ„t aÌ„d apperteining to the scripturs with skoffes yowe trauail to repreheÌ„d their graue authoritie aÌ„d godlie writings Yowe plaie and dallie with them before the people like a ioung Porphirie as though they were things of naught Thus yow maie see as all that be wise and staied by Gods grace doo see howe fullie herin yowe bear the image and iustlie folowe the steppes of him that fiercelie as yowe doe persecuted with deadlie hatred the church and religion of Chryste Your third offence ys yet worse and more heinouse wher yowe haue vttered so manie vntrueths and lies euen aduersus DominuÌ„ aduersus ChristuÌ„ eius against our Lord aÌ„d against his Chryste against his holie gospell and against his holie woord Ys yowr matter soch M Iuell as yt can not be mainteined without lies and as the holie man Iob saied Nunquid Deus indiget vestro mendacio Hath God nede of your lies No so litle nede hath he of lies that he will destroie al theÌ„ that speak lies as the psalmist saieth But that I seeÌ„ not to charg yowe without proof as yowe do other ys not one of your chalenging articles against the presence of Chrysts bodie and blood in the blessed Sacr ys not the doctrine yowe teach and preache in that poinct directlie contrarie to the doctrine of our Sauiour Chryst WheÌ„ he saieth This ys my bodie This ys my blood and yowe auouche and teache that yt ys verie bread and verie wine ys not this a contrarie doctrine to his ys yt not plain against his manifest woorde ys yt not in effect to charge him with vntrueth though yowe daie not yet in flat woordes saie that he lied The craftie sleight yowe vse in handling the scripture wher the trueth of Chrysts doctrin doeth appeare aÌ„d your wielie suppressioÌ„ of those woords which cheiflie declare the same trueth aÌ„d opeÌ„ yowr vntrueth doe wel proue youre wicked meening to be none other For taking the woords of S. Paule for the theme of your sermoÌ„ yowe produced theÌ„ truncatedlie and passed theÌ„ with moch sleight Thus yowe vtter theÌ„ I haue receaued of the Lord that thing which also I deliuered vnto yow that ys that the lord Iesus in the night that he was betraied took bread aÌ„d ther yowe end Wher although yowe preteÌ„ted to teach the first institucioÌ„ of the Sacr. yet either of malice to suppresse Christs trueth or for feare to disclose your own vntrueth you wold not or durst not reherse the verie words of the institucioÌ„ which I wish al meÌ„ to note but both in the latin aÌ„d inglish as your faith staeth in bread and as yow wold the faith of your audieÌ„ce should do the like your theme ended in bread in so moch as wheÌ„ yowe come to your last matter to speak of priuate Masse as yow tearm yt though falselie for ther ys none soch and to proue yowr CoÌ„munioÌ„ beginne again to repete the woords of the institucioÌ„ Lord what shift yowe make to suppresse the words of Chryst This ys my bodie This ys my blood in the which lieth al the effect of his institucioÌ„ These woords yowe flie as froÌ„ a serpeÌ„t yowe caÌ„ not abide the sownd of theÌ„ aÌ„d therfor with shamful craft yowe passe theÌ„ saing thus Chryst in the last supper ordeined a CoÌ„munioÌ„ aÌ„d shewed no maner token of priuate Masse as maie plainlie appeare both by the woordes that he spake and also by the order of his doings For be tooke the bread brake yt deuided yt aÌ„d gaue yt to his Disciples and saied Drinke ye all herof These be yowr own woords Yowe preteÌ„ded to proue your matter by Chrysts woords aÌ„d order but wheÌ„ yowe come to the verie point yowe do not as moch as touch his woords but skippe ouer theÌ„ so well maie your prof appeare bi theÌ„ aÌ„d so loath are yowe to vtter Christ words that his trueth might appear aÌ„d your falshead be disclosed Against your first offeÌ„ce which ys your abuse of the doctours in mutilating their saings as yow doo Anacletus in falsifieng their meening as yow do Tertullian and S. Cyprian in craftie alleaging two or three woordes that apparantlie maie seem to make for yowe leauing oute the rest that mightilie maketh against yowe as yowe doe sainct Augustine in corrupting authours by putting woordes to their saings which they haue not as yowe doe with Leo wherbie euidentlie appeareth yowr conteÌ„pt of their autoritie whom by so manie means yowe labour to abuse to shadowe and hide the trueth by them so clerelie settfurth I come in right vse reuerentlie alleaging them whollie and fullie producing them truelie reporting them and their mening iustlie letting euerie of them plainlie to testifie that whiche he hath written and causing euerie one to speake his owne woordes without corruption And that yowe maie perceaue that the catholique Churche ys strong against the whiche the gates of hell the power of heresie shall not preuaill knowe yowe that yt ys Terribilis castorum acies ordinata a terrible fortresse in most goodlie order appoincted Oute of the which fortresse in goodlie order ys comed a great nombre against yowe marching by cooples eche coople to shewe the vnitie of trueth and faith professed in bothe Churches being one of the greke church and other of the latine churche and the seniours for the most part placed in the forewarde These haue I brought furth not one alone and by piece meale so to rume awaie with the matter as yowe doo but in good nombres and with their full saings and the same doo I oftentimes conferr together that the full and perfect cleernesse of the trueth in ther consonant sentences maie appear and shine to all that list to looke therat and be disposed to knowe the trueth Against yowr second offence which ys the mocking of holie writers and Saincts wherbie yowe seke to dishonour and deface bothe them and the religion they professed I come with due reuerence and honour of them whoÌ„ I knowe by Chrysts promesse to be honourable before the Father in heauen for their constant confession of his holie name whilest they liued here vpon earth Wherfor as being vpon the earth they were not gests and straungers but the felowes of Saincts and of the house of God I tearme them as senatours of the Parliament house of Chryste as knowing the enacted and receaued trueth of the matters of faith perteining to that house For this cause I regard all their writings which the catholique Churche hath allowed considering that the same Churche that hath taught me that the gospell that ys the verie woorde of God written by the mocion and instruction of his holie Spirit hath taught me that these mens wiritings vpon the same are good and commendable And as with S. Augustine

diuinis scripturis erudjtiss et non minus Lanfrancus Tritemius sanctitate quam scientia clarus a man in the dyuyne scryptures most excellentlie learned and no lesse in holynesse then in knoweledge notable Against the same also wrote Algerus and Guitmundns men not by my commeÌ„dacion onelie to be accepted but by the Iudgement of Erasmus also a man Algerus Guitmundus not onely knowen to the worlde but also specyallie famouse in thys Realme of Englonde who openyng to vs what these two men were sheweth therwtih the benefitt of God that cometh to hys churche by hys sufferaÌ„ce of errours and heresyes to growe And enombryng dyuerse heresies coÌ„ceaued against the blessed Sacrament he saieth thus Et tamen horum omnium error in hoc profecit vt in tanti mysterij cognitionem magis ac magis tum erudita tum confirmata Sras in epistola ad Balthasarum Episc HildesÃ¹m sit ecclesia Nulli tameÌ„ plus debet quÃ m BereÌ„gario imo noÌ„ BereÌ„gario sed ChrstisapieÌ„ tiae qui malitiaÌ„ hominuÌ„ vertit in bonuÌ„sponsaesuae Quos qualiuÌ„ viroruÌ„ calamos excitauit impudens error Berengarij Nuper exijt opus Guitmundi ex monacho Benedictino episcopi Auersensis Nunc prodit Algerus ex scholastico monachus eiusdem instituti Guitmundus acrior est ardeÌ„tior plus habet spiritus Rethorici hic sedatior est ac religiosior vterque tum Dialectices tum reliquae philosophiae bellÃ¨ peritus licet citra osteÌ„tationem vterque in canonicis scripturis ac priscis illis doctoribus Cypriano Hilario Ambrosio Hieronimo Augustino Basilio Chrisostomo quorum scripta plurimÃ¹m adhuc reserunt spiritus Apostolici studiosÃ¨ versatus vterque tantum habet eloquentiae quantum requirere Ã theologo par est CertÃ¨ dictionis argutiam collectionis acumen nusquam in eis desideres Agunt solidis rationibus nec vt nunc quidam faciunt bonam voluminis partem rixis Christ turneth the malice of Heretiques to the profett of his Church contentionibus occupant aut sophisticis ratiunculis rem tractant And yet the erroure of all these saieth Erasmus dyd prosytt in this that in the hnowledge of so great a mysterye the Churche shoulde be both more and more instructed and also confyrmed Yet ys she to none more bownde then to Berengarius yet not to BereÌ„garius but to the wysdoÌ„ of Chryste who turneth the malice of men to the profett of his spouse â–ª what writing iea and of what men hath this impudent erroure of Berengarius stirred vppe Of late went oute Erasmus calleth the errour of BereÌ„garius impudent the woorke of Quitmundus somtyme a benedyctyne Monke and Bishoppe of Auergne nowe commeth furth the worke of Algerus of a scholer made a monke of the same ordre Guitmundus ys sharpe and vehement and hath more of the rethoricall spiritte the other milde and religiouse bothe of them well learned both in logike and philosophie although withoute osteÌ„tation both of them well studied both in the canonicall scriptures and in the olde doctors Cyprian Hillarie Ambrose Hierom Augustin Basill and Chrisostome whose writinges do yet declare moche of the Apostolicall spiritte Bothe of theÌ„ haue as moch eloquence as ys meet to be required of a diuine As for wittie speache and sharpenesse of collection ther ys no lacke in them in anie place They go to yt with substanciall reasons neither do they as some whiche occupie a good parte of ther bookes with braulinges and contencioÌ„s and handle the matter with sophisticall disputacions reasons Thus moche Erasmus I haue the more willinglie transcribed thus moche of Erasmus bicause the Aduersaries haue had him in good price and regarded his sainges Yf this champion do the like let him diligentlie obserue that Erasmus calleth the erroure of Berengarius an impudenterroure Whiche so being forsomoch as this man ys drowned in the same and mainteineth the same maie we not Errour of the Proclamer impudent iustlie saie that he impudentlie mainteineth an impudent erroure Let him also note howe he commendeth these men and what Iudgement he hath of their learning bothe in liberall sciences in Scriptures and doctours whoÌ„ he doth also no lesse extoll but that by their writinges God hath doen a great benefet to his Churche whiche so standing yt can not be but that the Scriptures and doctours be plain and euident for the proof of the veritie Yf their writing be a benefett then this chalengers doimgeys a detriment Petrus Waldo skoureth the estie heresie of BereÌ„garius of the reall presence of Christes bodie in the Sacrament whiche scriptures and doctours adduced by these learned men be mo then one or one score and yet this Proclamer crieth bring one doc c. After Berengarius rose one Petrus Waldo a citizen of Lions a man vnlearned yet as vulearned as he was when he had newlie skoured the rustie condemned heresie of BereÌ„garius in soch rude maner as yt was manie were so folish and so readie to fall from faith to heresie from life to death and damnacion from teaching of the learned to the teaching of the ignoraruÌ„t that thei chose raither to folowe the phantasie of this one rude man void of knowledge than to remain in the Substancial tried doctrine of a nombre of holie and most excellent learned men of Christes Churche Thus more pietie yt was a mombre folowed hym and became his disciples and were called Waldenses Waldenses Heretiques condeÌ„ned Vnto whom becomminge an Aucthor and blinde guide according to Christes saing he led them so as both fell into the ditche This secte and heresie of this Waldo was not suffred to stand but as Guido saieth was condemned in a Councell holden at Rome And yet this Proclamer saieth ther was neuer man indged for an heretike that saied the Sacrament was a figure a token c. In the tyme of saincte Bernarde Satan wolde moue yet some more trooble to the Churche and therfor raised one Peter de Bruis whom he taught to Petrus Brusian his heresie sell theise lies to the people for trueths that though Christ in his last supper did in the SacrameÌ„t geue hys bodie to his Apostles yet no preist doth so nowe by the power of his woorde as yt ys saied that they doe For neuer anione quoth he but Christ alone did geue his bodie in the Sacrament Although thys heresie geuing soche preeminence to Christ that by cause he saied thys ys my bodye teacheth that he in dede gaue to hys Apostles hys verye bodie ys woorthy of more fauour theÌ„ the heresie whiche thys Proclamer teacheth for not withstanding that our Sauiour Chryst saied Thys ys my bodie yet thys Aduersarie teacheth yt ys not yet passed not this heresie awaie in scylence but was wrytten against by dyuerse Among whyche Petrus Gluniacensis whose commendation ys so moche settfurth in dyuerse Epistles of saynct Bernarde that he nedeth not myne to commend hym wrote Petrus

as I also wolde be ashamed to wryte theÌ„ yf they were not scripture He speaking of an harlotte writeth thus Like as one that goeth by the waie and ys Ecclesiast 62. thristie so shall she open her mouth and drynke of euerie next water that she maie gette By euerie hedge shall she sitte her downe and open her quoiuer to euerie arrowe What trifeling what iestyng what pastime I haue heard and seen vpon the reading and reherfall of this texte and what vnseemlie and vnchaist woordes haue fallen oute by occasioÌ„ of the same yt ys vnmeete in this place to be rehersed But this I will reporte for that as trulie as God liueth I knowe yt to be true This texte was spoken in the presence of a good vertueouse gentlewoman and one that feared God and she misliking the same yt was auouched to her to be scripture The booke was turned the place was red she exclamed and saied that yf the scripture had soche bawdie woordes she wolde no more beleue the scripture for yt was naught with mo soche like woordes which nowe memorie reteyneth not Maye not this grieue a christian heart that the scriptures Gods holie woorde shoulde be thus blasphemed And what ys the cause of yt verilie bicause they be made common to their handes that vnderstande them not That this place was not vnderstanded of them that handeled the same as ys afore saied yt ys more manifest then I nede reporte For the effecte well proueth yt Nowe to put a conclusion to this that ys here saied litle dothe yt awaill them to reade the scriptures that vnderstand not what they reade But raither as Origen saieth they maye as well take occasion of euell as of good by reading the scriptures and not in their true sense and meeming vnderstand them whose sentence for the better declaracion therof I haue here noted Opera carnis diuinorum voluminuÌ„ historia continet non valde eos iuuans qui sic eam intelligunt vt scripta est Quis enim non docebitur scruire luxuriae fornicationem habere Origen 10. li. Strom. pro nihilo cum Iudam ad meretricem legerit ingredientem Patriarchas multas pariter habuisse vxores Quomodo non ad idololatrian prouocabitur qui sanguinem taurorum caeteras Leuitici victimas non plus quÃ m in litera sonat putauerit indicare Gene. 38. Quod autem inimicitias in aperto positus scripturae sermo doceat ex hoc loco probatur Filia Babylonis misera beatus qui retribuet tibi retributionem quam retribuisti nobis Psal 136. Psal 100. Beatus qui tenebit allidet paruulos suos ad petram Et exillo In matutino interficiebam omnes peccatores terrae et ex ijs similibus de contentionibus videlicet aemulatione ira rixis dissentionibus Ad quae si non altius aliquid sentiamus prouocant nos magis historiae exempla quÃ m prohibent Haereses quoque magis de carnali scripturae intellectu quam de opera carnis nostrae vt plurimi aestimant substiterunt Nec non ebrietates et inuidiam per legis literam discimus Inebriatur NoÃ« post Diluuium et Patriarchae apud fratrem Ioseph in AEgypto The histories of Gods books saieth Origen contein the workes of the flessh whiche historie dothe not moche helpe them whiche dooso vnderstande yt as yt ys written For who shall not be taught to serue voluptuouse pleasure and to accompte fornycation for nothinge when he shall reade Iudas to haue taken an harlotte and the Patriarkes to haue had manie wifes at once Howe shall he not be prouoked to Idolatrie who shall thinke the blood of Bulls and other Leuiticall sacrifices no more to shewe vnto him then the letter sowndeth That the plain sainge of the scripture teacheth enemities yt ys proued both by this place Daughter of Babilon thowe shalt come to myserie thy self yea happie shall he be that rewardeth thee as thowe hauest serued vs. Blessed shall he be that taketh thy children and throweth them against the stones And also by that place I shall soon destroie all the vngodlie that are in the lande And by soche other like vnto theise as of contencion enuie wrathe brawlinges dissentions vnto the whiche yf ye vnderstand not some higher thing the examples of the histories do more prouoke vs then forbidde vs. Heresies also Diuerse histories of Scripture literallie taken doe more prouoke sinne than forbidde yt haue ben more by the carnall vnderstanding of the scriptures then by the worke of our flesh as manie do thinke We learn also by the letter of the lawe dronkennes and enuie NoÃ« after the flood was dronken And the Patriarkes also were droncken being with their Brother Ioseph in AEgypte Thus Origen Nowe then as in this chapiter ye haue heard a nombre of bookes and places of scripture recited whiche well proue the obscuritie and hardnesse of the same So yn the ende ye haue heard Origen declaring his minde that to vnderstand but the carnall sense of yt ys raither hurtfull to edificacion then profitable Peraduenture some will graunte that the olde Testament ys darke and hard but the newe Testament they will saie ys easie and plain But that this likwise ys not easie for euerie man to vnderstande the chapiter folowing shall declare THE THIRDE CHAPITER TO DECLARE the newe Testament not to be easie to be vnderstanded bringeth diuerse obscure places of the same THAT the newe Testament ys hard to be vnderstanded yt ys sufficientlie proued in the frist chapiter Neuerthelesse that the Reader maie haue some experieÌ„ce of that that by Authoritie ys saied I shall laie before hym certain places whiche shall enforce hym to confesse that by his owne iudgement to be true whiche by the scriptures he hath allreadie heard taught and affirmed And first let him beginne with the Genealogie of Chryste described vnto vs by two Euangelistes Matthew and Luke And let them be compared together and triall made whether yt be esaie to concile them or no. Matthewe beginneth at the elders as at Abraham and so descendeth to Chryste Luke beginneth at Chryste and ascendeth vppe to the elders euen vnto AdaÌ„ and so to God In the whiche Genealogie Luke saieth that Chryst The Euangeâ—istes Mathew and Luke seem to varte in the genealogie of Chryst was the supposed sonne of Ioseph and that Ioseph was the sonne of Heli Matthewe saieth that Iacob begatte Ioseph the husband of Mary of whoÌ„ was born Iesus whiche ys called Chryste So that Luke saieth that Iosep was the sonne of Heli and Matthew saieth he was the sonne of Iacob Which dysagrement Iulianus Augustus the Apostata as saincte HieroÌ„ saieth obiected vnto vs. Which obiection al though it be solued by saincte HieroÌ„ yet ther remaineth a great difficultie howe these Genealogies shoulde be true and both pertain to Chryste seing that from Ioseph to Dauid ther ys none agrement betwixt theÌ„ as by comparing of the EuaÌ„gelistes

poinctes of our faith I shall bring in one other place of the same wher he handeleth the same place of Iob to the pourpose before mencioned Medio draconis ventre rupto atque discerpto ex adytis clarissimus euasit radios non ad hoc vsque coelum sed ad ipsum supernum thronum Chrys in 101. Cor. omel 24. dimisit Illuc namque ipsum extulit quod nobis etiam exhibuit vt teneremus et maÌ„ ducaremus quod maximum dilectionis signum est Quos enim amamus nonnunquÃ m etiam morsu petimus Quare Iob vt seruoruÌ„ in se amoreÌ„ ostenderet dicebat illos nimio in se amore dixisse Quis det de carnibus eius vt saturemur Ita Christus suam carneÌ„ dedit nobis vt ea saturemur Quo nos in plurimum sui amorem allexit The beallie of the dragon being brast and torne in the middle froÌ„ the darke place he came furth most bright and clere and sent oute his beames not vnto this heaueÌ„ but vnto the verie high Throne Thyther hath he caried vppe that which also he hath geuen vnto vs that we shoulde holde and eate yt which ys the greatest token of loue For whome we loue oftentimes we desire to byte Therfor Iob that he might declare the loue of his seruantes towardes him saied that they for the exceading loue that they bare towards him haue oftentimes saied Who will geue vs of his flesh that we maie be filled Euen so Christ hath geuen vs hys flesh that we might be fylled withal wherbie he hath allured vs vnto his great loue In the which senteÌ„ce gentle Reader thow seist and perceauest fyrst howe Chrysostome reherseth the storie of Iob and secondlie how he applieth yt vnto Chryst saing Euen so Christ hath geuen vs his flesh to holde and to eate The which his applicacion doth verifie my saing that Iob was in this behalf a figure that Christes flesh shoulde be eaten and that not spirituallie onelie but reallie and substaÌ„ciallie which Chrysostome signifieth by this woorde Ita euen so as who should saie As the very substanciall flesh of Iob was desired to be eaten Euen so Chryst hath geuen vs his verie substanciall flesh to be eaten Thus am I not onelie moued to vnderstand ChrysostoÌ„ for the cause now mencioned But I am therunto compelled by that that in him immediatelie foloweth Ad eum igitur cum feruore accedamus dilectione quÃ m vehementissima ne grauius subeamus supplicium Quanto enim maius beneficium accepimus tanto magis puniemur quando eo indigni apparebimus Let vs therfore come vnto him with ferueÌ„t Chrys ibi desire and moste vehement loue leste we suffer more greuouse punishment For the more great benefet we haue receaued the more shall we be punished yf we be fownde vnwoorthie of yt And he addeth Hoc corpus in praesepi reueriti sunt Magi c. This bodie did the wise men reuerence or honour in the maunger Wherby he declareth what bodie of Chryst he moueth vs to come vnto here in this his conclusion Wherbie also we maie vnderstande what flesh of Chryste he ment in the former sentence by the applicacion of the figure to the thing figured But this maie suffice for the sigures in the law of nature THE FIFTENE CHAPITER DECLARETH BY scripturs that the eating of the Paschall lambe was a figure of the eating of Chryst our Paschall Lambe NOwe that I haue spoken of soche scriptures as declare soche thinges to haue ben doen in the law of nature which by other scriptures and holie Fathers are applied and taken as figures of Chrystes preisthood and mysterie I will go forwarde to the figures Four figures of the Sacrament to be treacted of in the time of the lawe of Moyses of the which I will speake and treact of foure whiche be figures of this mysterie Which be The Paschall Lambe Manna The Shewbread and the Stone flowing oute water Of the fyrst that ys of the Paschall LaÌ„be we read thus In the tenth daie of Exod. 12. this moneth euery maÌ„ shall take vnto him a lambe accordinge to their houses and families c. And let the lambe of yours be withoute blemish a male of a yeare olde whiche ye shall take oute from emonge the Shepe and ye shall kepe him vntill the xiiij daie of the same moneth And euery man of the multitude of the children of Israell shall kill him at euen And they shall take the bloode and strike yt on the two syde postes and on the vpper doer poste euen in the houses wher they shall eate hym And they shall eate the flesh that same night rosted with fyre and with vnleauened bread and with sowre herbes they shall eate yt See that ye eate not therof rawe nor soddeÌ„ in water but rosted with fyre the head feet and purtenauÌ„ce therof In this declaracion of the maner of eating the Paschall Lambe ther be Two notable thinges in the olde Paschall laÌ„ be two principall partes The one ys of the killinge of yt The other of the eatinge of yt The condicion and maner of the lambe and the killing of the same figureth the condicion of Chryste and the crucifyeng of hym And albeit that other beastes being taken to be sacrificed as oxe cowe calf and kilde did figure the passion of Chryste Yet none of these doth so liuelie and expressedlie figure Chryste and hys death as the lambe dothe For the lambe was but younge Chryst was but younge The lambe was withoute Christ and the Paschall laÌ„be compared together blemish Chryste was withoute sinne The lambe was taken from emonge the shepe Chryste from emonge hys Apostles By the offringe of that lambe the people of Israell were deliuered from the seruitute of Aegypte By the offringe of Chryst the people are deliuered from the seruitude of the deuell and sinne Their daile sacrifice was a lambe Owre daile sacrifice ys Chryste And for this consideracion Chryst ys more oftentymes Christ more often called a LaÌ„be then by name of anie other beast called a lambe in the scripture then by the name of other beastes which were sacrificed and figured Chryst the euerlasting sacrifice Wherfore saincte Ihon the Baptist applieng the figure of the lambe as a thing most speciallie and fullie figuring Chryste pointed him with his fyngar sainge Ecce Agnus Dei ecce qui tollit peccata mundi Beholde the Lambe of God beholde him that taketh awaie the sinnes of the Joan. 1. woorlde The Prophet also calleth him a lambe Tanquam ouis ad occisionem ducetur tanquam agnus coram tondente se obmutescit He shall be led awaie Esai 53. like a shepe to be slain and as a lambe before the sherer shall he holde hys peace For like consideracion sainct Ihon being instructed by the reuelacion of the holie Gost dothe so call him after he had fulfilled the figure by suffring of his passion I

the perfecte nature of man and so confesseth Chryst to be verie God and verie Man folowed their master Eutiches and taught as in the Chalcedon Councell yt ys testified that Chryste before the adunacion was of two natures but after the adunacion he was but of one nature whiche was God and therfore denieng Chryste to be man confessed him onelie to be God Wherfor folowing Appollinaris Valentinus and Macedonius they wolde not receaue this common article of ourfaith Whiche was conceauedby the holie Goste born of the virgen Mary Nowe as these confessed Chryst to be God So this Theodorete labouring to proue him also to be man bringeth in this figure of Melchisedech whiche as by eternitie yt proueth him to be God For eternitie that ys to haue no beginning nor ending farre surmounteth the created nature of man and apperteineth to the increated nature of God So by the preisthead of Melchisedech whiche was in Chryst whiche being to base an office for God doth proprelie appertein to man he proueth Chryst to be a very Man Yf then the Aduersaries shall denie Melchisedech to be a figure of Chryst Aduersaries expositions maintein the heresie of Eutiches as touching his preisthead and sacrifice they shall take awaie the argument of this learned man and helping the parte of the heretikes shall weaken the parte of the catholiques And so where by the full and true applicacion of the figure Chryste ys proued to be both God and maÌ„ by the onelie applicacion of the eternitie whiche the Aduersaries wolde haue he shall be proued onelie God Nowe not onelie the argument of the matter proueth that this Authour brought in this figure cheifly to proue the manhead of Chryste whiche was the thing to be proued against Eutiches and that by the preisthead of Melchisedech But also his very plain woordes do proue the same For wheÌ„ he saieth In sacerdotio quod hominibus magis quÃ m Deo conuenit Dominus Christus secundÃ¹m ordinem Melchisedech Pontifex fuit In the preisthead whiche more agreeth to meÌ„ theÌ„ to God our Lorde Chryste was an gigh preist after the ordre of Melchisedech Leauing the eternitie of the Godhead of Chryste wherof Melchisedech was a figure in that he ys ouerpassed in the historie with oute mencion made either of his beginning or ending He commeth to that parte that proueth him a man whiche was to be a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech What ys yt to be apreist but to do the office of a preist What ys the office of a preist the office of a preist ys to offer Sacrifice to God for sinnes as Office of a preist saincte Paule wittnesseth whiche also this authour alleaging for his pourpose bringeth in thus Si est ergo sacerdotum proprium offerre munera Christus autem quod ad humanitatem attinet sacerdos appellatus est non aliam hostiaÌ„ quÃ m suum corpus obtulit Yf then yt be solie apperteining to preistes to offer sacrifice and Dial. 1. Chryste as coÌ„cerninge his humanitie was called a preist he offred no other sacrifice but his own bodie Then maie we also conclude that Chryst being a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech and the office of a preist after the ordre of Melchisedech ys to offer soche sacrifice as to that ordre apperteineth therfor Chryst offred soche sacrifie as to that ordre apperteineth Yt apperteineth to that ordre to offer bread and wine Wherfore Chryst sacrisiced in bread and wine In bread and wine I saie a kinde of foode of more excellencie then the bread and wine whiche did figure yt I meen with Theodoret and sainct Hierom the bodie and blood of Chryst the true bread and true wine whiche feadeth vs to liue the true life the life that endureth and faileth not Qui manducat Ioan. 6. hunc panem viuet in aeternum He that eateth this bread shall liue foreuer What neadeth me anie more to saie here seing that bothe sainct Hierom and Theodorete do thus plainly and agreablie as ye haue heard declare that Melchisehech was a figure as well of the preisthead and sacrifice of Chryst in that he offred sacrifice to God in bread and wine as of his eternitie for he ys accompted withoute ffather without mother without beginning or ending But Reader when thowe seest them so manifestlie erre and so maliciouslie impugne that whiche the holie Fathers doo teache by so plain sentence and expresse woordes as can not but be seen and perceaued except wher malice blindeth thinke with thy self that iust cause ys ministred vnto thee to feare them and their sainges in other matters Thus much for thy aduertisement by the waie being saied gentle Reader I will for thy further instruction and confirmacion of the matter bring yet mo wittnesses of the trueth herof THE ONE AND THIRTITH CHAPITER CONcludeth this matter of Melchisedech by saincte Augustin and Damascen AS ye haue allredie heard some auncient men of Chrystes Parliament howse agreablie testifieng the trueth of the figure of Melchisedech euen as yt hath ben enacted and receaued from the beginninge of the same howse So shall ye heare one coople more of them doing the like and so shall we ende the explicacion of this prophecie of the psalmist as touching the preisthead of Chryste after the ordre of Melchisedech Sainct Augustin writteh of the matter thus Erant sacrificia antea Iudaeorum secundÃ¹m ordinem Aaron in victimis pecorum hoc in Iu Psa 33. mysterio Nondum erat sacrificium corporis sanguinis Domini quod fideles norunt qui Euangelium legerunt quod sacrificiuÌ„ nunc diffusum est toto orbe Proponite ergo vobis ante oculos duo sacrificia illud secundÃ¹m ordinem Aaron et hoc secundÃ¹m ordinem Melchisedech Scriptum est enim turauit Dominus et non poenitebit eum Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundÃ¹m ordinem Melchisedech De quo dicitur Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundÃ¹m ordinem Melchisedech De Domino nostro Iesu Christo Quis enim erat Melchisedeh Rex Salem Saleni autem fuit Ciuitas illa quae postea sicut docti prodiderunt Hierusalem dicta est Ergo antequam ibi regnarent Iudaei ibi erat ille sacerdos Melchisedech qui scribitur in Genesi sacerdos Dei excelsi Ipse occurrit Abrahae quando liberauit Loth de manu persequentium et prostrauit illos Ã quibus tenebatur et liberauit fratrem Et post liberationem fratris occurrit et Melchisedech Tantus erat Melchisedech Ã quo benediceretur Abraham protulit paneÌ„ et vinum et benedixit Abraham et dedit ei decimas Abraham Videte quid protulit et quem benedixit et dictum est postea Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundÃ¹m ordinem Melchisedech Dauid hoc in spiritu dixit longÃ¨ post Abraham Temporibus autem Abrahae fuit Melchisedech De quo alio loco dicit Tu Ã¨s sacerdos in aeternum secundÃ¹m ordinem Melchisedech nisi

of S. Iohn allreadie declared wolde and maie sufficiently shewe his minde vpon this But God be praised he doth verie plainlie here also open the matter For Oure lord feadeth vs with a bread which ys his flesh A plain saing for the Procla when he had saied that our Lorde wolde feed vs with a better bread expownding yt that ys saieth he his flesh And that he wolde not make yt an imaginarie flesh he saieth that he feedeth vs with the same flesh whiche withoute the seed of man was born of the Virgen Whiche maner of speache ys so plain that I caÌ„not but merueill that men will suffer them selues to be seduced and led awaie by vain men when soche auncient Fathers do teache them in soche sorte that they haue nothing to kepe them selues from the trueth but self will and malice THE THREE AND THIRTETH CHAP. PROCEADETH to the next text in the sixt of saincte Iohn HItherto our SauiourChryst speaking of this great mistery of the eatinge and drinking of his flesh and bloode doth here nowe make an ende of the same And therfor saieth the Euangelist to declare the same Hec dixit in Sinagoga docens in Cpharnaum These thinges saied he in the Sinagog as he taught in Capharnaum Joan. 6. But for asmoche as manie hearning this doctrine of Chryst were not edified but offended therwith as manie of our faint Chrystians are whose maner of incredulitie and hardnesse of beleif with Chrystes proceading to SacrameÌ„taries of oure time are Capharnaites reforme the same as the Euangelist setteth yt furth our Capharnaites through vnbeleif of that that Chryst spake to the better declaracion of his doctrine haue taken to the more occasion of their doubte eroure and ruine seing that they wolde so take his woordes to turne them against him self and with them to impugne that trueth that he hath taught and left in his Church to remain and continue vntill he come we shall by his grace take these scriptures from them and by like processe as hertofore ys vsed shewe the true vnderstanding of them that all men maie perceaue that these Aduersaries haue raither sought occasion to be raither enemies of Gods trueth then fauourers of the same whiche name they moche vsurpe cloathing them selues with shepes cloathinge but inwardlie they are very wolues Heretikes call their phantasies gods woord and their lies trueth outwardlie they euer crie Gods woorde when in dede they vtter their inuencions grownded vpon affection raither to please the peoples phantasies then fullfill Gods pleasure So they crie the trueth the trueth when they in very dede set furth lies and heresie to impugn and destroie the trueth And as they that misliked the doctrine of Chryst were of his Disciples So these nowe that mislike the same doctrine were of his Disciples but nowe abierunt retro post Satanam they are gone back after Satan And as the disciples saied when they heard this doctrine Durus est hic sermo quis potest eum audire This ys an hard saing who can abide the hearing of yt So these men saie that yt ys an hard saing and they can not abide the hearing of yt But as sainct Augustin saied by the Disciples which first spake these woordes Aug in Psal 98. So maie yt be saied by their disciples who in these daies do folowe theÌ„ Ipsi erant duri non sermo They were hard and not the woorde But as he saieth in an other place Si Discipuli durum habuerunt istum sermonem quid inimici Yf the Disciples counted this woorde harde what do the enemies Yf those that did knowe and folow Chryst of late daies do accoÌ„pte yt an hard saing that we saie according to Chrystes doctrin that we do eate his very flesh in the Sacrament what maie the Iewes and Infideles do But yf Chryst did labour to abduce the Iewes from the figures and shaddowes and adduce them to the very thing and trueth moche more they that haue professed Chryst should be brought from figures and learn to knowe the trueth of figures which ys nowe in the newe testament Which was Chrystes pourpose though they lept backe as Theophilact saieth speaking of the processe of Chrystes doctrine as concerning this mysterie Quod lucrum ex his verbis imÃ² plurimum maximuÌ„ Theophilact in 6. Joan. Nam quoniam memores erant subinde cibi corporalis ostendens eis quia omnia illa figura erant vmbrai Quae autem ab ipso nunc introducuntur veritas sunt eius gratia haec dicit spiritualis cibi recordatur vt faciat eos Ã sensibilibus aliquantum remergere coÌ„temnereî€‚ue figuras vmbras accurrere ad veritatem Sed illi cÃ¹m nibil possent intelligere quod supra sensum est meliores non fiunt sed magis resiliunt dicunt Durus est hic sermo hoc est asper qui suscipi nequeat Quis enin cÃ¹m carnalis sit posset suscipere spiritualem cibum panem qui de coelo descenda carnem quae comeditur c. Nam quia carnem audierant putabant quÃ²d eos cogeret carnis sanguinis fieri deuoratores quia autem nos spiritualiter intelligimus neque carnium voratores sumus imÃ² sanctificamur per talem cibum What aduantage or gain of these woordes very moche and great For for that they were often mindefull of bodilie meat Chryst shewing that all those thinges were but a figure and a shaddowe but soche things as by him were brought in were the trueth for this cause he saied these thinges and remembreth the spirituall meate that he might make them somwhat return from sensible thinges and to contemne figures and shaddowes But they Carnall meÌ„ vnderstanding nothing aboue thersensies leape backe from the vnderstanding of the Sacr. when they can vnderstand nothing that ys aboue the senseis they are made neuer the better but they leape aÌ„d saie This saing ys harde that ys vnpleasaunt to sensuall knowledge and which can not be receaued For what ys he who when he ys carnall can receaue spirituall meat and the bread that desceÌ„ded froÌ„ heauen and the flesh which ys eateÌ„ for bicause they had heard him saie flesh they thought that he wolde compell them to be deuourers of flesh aÌ„d blood But bicause we vnderstand the spirituall meat we are not the deuourers of flesh but raither we are sanctified by soch meat Thus moch Theoph. Who geuing a cause why this doctrine of Chryst semed hard to them saieth yt was bicause they coulde not vnderstand anie thing that was aboue Carnall vnderstaÌ„ding the knowledge of the senseis Euen so our sensuall and carnall men vnderstanding not howe Chrystes verie bodie should be in the Sacrament vnlesse yt shoulde occupie the place of a bodie neither be eaten vnlesse yt shoulde be felt with our teeth as other flesh and soch like after the grosse knowledg of the senseis they leape backe and saie yt can not be

his eyes Whervpon belcuing the mysteries of the Chrystians to be merueillouse and wonderfull the next daie he came to S. Basill and desired to be baptised and made a chrystian Thus we maie perceaue that the workes of God be great and merueillouse who vnto this Iewe but suspecting the chrystians to eate flesh and drinke bloode in their mysteries made yt soch to him as he suspected yt to be and to appeare soche to his seight as yt was couertlie to other in verie dede But he sawe yt with his bodilie eye for his instruction that the true Chrystian seeth with his faithfull eye to his saluacion But to return to our first matter so great was the fame that the Chrystians did eate maÌ„nes flesh in their mysteries that to deliuer theÌ„ froÌ„ the enuie that was coÌ„ceaued against theÌ„ for the same Iustinus the holie martyr was enforced in his Apollogie made vnto Antonius Pius to reueil and declare vnto him all the wholl order of the mysteries of the chrystians and what was their faith therin whiche thing was not vsed in those daies to be declared to anie prophane man and infidel but allwaies kept secrette so moche as yt might be And yet vpon this enforcemeÌ„t this Iustinus declared the matter so plainlie as no man of his auncientie to soche men more plainlie as shortlie here after ye shall perceaue As these thinges then hitherto saied do proue by the same that Chryst ys present in the Sacrament and so consequentlie that the woordes of Chryst haue ben and so ought to be vnderstanded in their propre sense withoute trope or figure So wolde I wish them of all chrystians in these daies to be receaued And as by these thinges we maie be moued So by other reasons we maie from the contrarie vnderstanding be disswaded Among manie of whiche I wil bring but one or two that Rupertus doth make and the first ys this Nonne Ioannes Euangelista dicit in Apocalipsi Si quis apposuerit ad haec apponet super illuÌ„ Rupert li. 6. in Joan. Apoca. 22. Deus plagas scriptas in libro isto Et si quis diminuerit de verbis prophetiae libri huius auferet Deus partem eius de ligno vitae de ciuitate sancta de ijs quae scripta sunt in libro isto Nunquid minÃ¹s timenda est hic illa maledictio vt non detrahamus vel apponamus quidquam verbis dicentis Hoc est corpus meum quod pro vobis tradetur Hic est sanguis meus noui testamenti qui pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum CÃ¹m enim illo dicente Hoc est corpus meum nos subauditionem apposuerimus dicentes figuratiuum vel per similitudinem dictum CÃ¹m inquam illo dicente Hoc est corpus meum nos dixerimus hoc signisicat corpus meum nonne multum est quod apponimus vel praua demutatione detrahimus sensum generamus quem tantus Author Deus homo nusquaÌ„ est locutus nec ascendit vnquam in cor eius Dothe not the Euangelist Iohn saie in the Apocalipse Yf anie man shall adde vnto these thinges God shal adde vnto him the plagues that are written in this booke And yf anie man shall minishe of the woordes of the booke of this prophecie God shall take awaie his parte oute of the booke of life and oute of the holie To the woordes of God maie nothing be added nor diminished citte and the thinges whiche are written in this booke Ys this maledictioÌ„ or curse lesse to be feared here that we diminish not or putte any thing to the woordes of him that saied This ys my bodie whiche shall be deliuered for yow This ys my bloode of the newe testament whiche shall be shedde for manie in the remissioÌ„ of sinnes For when he saieth This ys my bodie we shall putto an vnderstanding saing a figuratiue bodie or that yt ys spoken by a similitude when I saie he saieth This ys my bodie we shall saie this signifieth my bodie ys yt not moche that we putto his woordes or by an euell chaunge take from them and make a sense whiche so great an Authour God and man in no place hath spoken neither at anie time did yt ascende in to his heart Thus Rupertus This ys the first reason of this Authour whiche yf yt be well weighed and the thing well considered howe moche we by figures tropes and significacions do alter and chaunge howe moche we putto in woordes and diminish in substance howe the exposition denieth that the text affirmeth we haue good cause to feare the malediction of God spoken by S. Iohn who beareth not soche expositions denieng what he hath saied nor soche gloses confownding his text Wherfore we maie well be dissuaded from soche expositions or rather deprauacions and the rather that their ys no warrant to beare vs so to expownde these woordes of Chryst as of the circumstance of the place maie be perceaued whiche this Authour vseth as an other reason to moue vs not so to vnderstande Chrystes woordes of his supper as the Aduersarie dothe expownde them And thus he saieth CÃ¹m obijcit quis suisî€‚ue scriptitat in sedulis quod itidem dixerit eadem veritas Ego sum vitis tam audacter quaÌ„ imperitÃ¨ in argumentum mendosum illud attrahit cum statim subsequentia verba dicentist Sicut palmes non potest ferre fructum Ã semetipso nisi manserit in vite sic nec vos nisi in me manseritis manifestÃ¨ per similitudinem compellant intelligi praesertim cÃ¹m non signanter dixerit Ego sum haec vitis sicut signanter dixit Hoc est corpus meum hic est sanguis meus apposita protinus descriptione verae proprietatis de corpore inquiens quod pro vobis tradetur de san guine autem qui pro multis effundetur Igitur ne veniant super nos plagae nouissimae neque apponimus neque diminuimus quicquam diuinae definitioni vel descriptioni quam incarnatum Verbum ore proprio deproinpsit Imo quia perfecta charitas foras mittit timorem non tam plagarum timore qunm veritatis amore confitemur quia panis iste corporeus postquam signauerit eum Pater vinum hoc expressum acinis praesentibus mox vt eodem signo signatum est per manus ecclesiae dicentis vt nobis corpus sanguis fiat dilectissimi filij tui Domini nostri Iesu Christi etc. vsque in memoriaÌ„ mei facietis corpus sanguis eius qui huius traditionis author est hoc sacrisicium ipse Christus est cuius passione vt sacrificium fieret Ã Deo Patre in veritate signatum est WheÌ„ one obiecteth and writeth yt also in his bookes euen as boldlie as vnlearned These woordes J am a vine Ioan. 15. are proued by the circuÌ„stance to be a similitudi lie that the same trueth mening Chryst saieth also I am a vine he draweth yt

none Nowe then shall we not condemne them by their owne iudgement Lutherans doctrine hauing no apparaÌ„t scripture ys ouer throwen by ther owne argument wherwith they haue trauailed in manie thinges to condemne the catholique Church What ys defined decreed or determined by the Churche if ther be not manifest scripture for the same yt ys condemned of them as a tradicion of man and a doctrine of Sathan But this their doctrine hath no manifest scriptures Wherfore yt ys a tradicion of man and a doctrine of Sathan Thus as Aman was hanged vpon the same Galowes that he had made for innocent Mardochaeus So ys their wicked doctrine ouerthrowen with their owne iudgement and vanquissed with their owne swoorde But what shall I occupie the time and trooble the reader in refelling this fonde heresie seing as a litle before ys declared by Eusebius that the inuisible preist Chryst by his power with his woorde doeth turne the visible creatures into the substance of his bodie and bloode Chrysostome also saieth that the preistes be in the place of the mynisters of God but yt ys Chryst that doeth sanctifie and chaunge the substances of bread and wine And breiflie to saie sainct Ambrose in the last chapiter Euthymius Damascen and Theophilact in the chapter before doe testisie that the worke of consecracion ys doen by the power of God by the accession of the holie Gost and by the woorde of Chryst spoken by the preist in the person of Chryste As yt ys also testified in the Florentine Concilium Florent Councell wher yt ys thus declared Forma huius sacramenti sunt verba Saluatoris quibus hoc conficit Sacramentum Sacerdos enim in persona Christi loquens hoc conficit Sacramentum Nam ipsorum verborum virtute substantia panis in corpus Christi substantia vini in sanguinem conuertuntur The forme of this Sacrament be the woordes of our Sauiour by the whiche he consecrateth this Sacrament For the preist speaking in the person of Chryst doeth consecrate this Sacrament For by the vertue of those woordes the substance of bread ys turned into the bodie of Christ and the substance of wine TraÌ„substaÌ„tiacion into hys bloode Thus the Councell By whiche woordes as by the woordes of them also before alleaged yt ys manifestly declared that the power of the consecracion of the bodie of Chryst ys not depending of the will of the receauer but of the power of God of the worke of the holie Gost and of the vertue of the woordes of Chryst spoken by the preist in the person of Chryste And as this fonde heresie semeth to be mother of that heresie that impugneth reseruacion so that that ys before saied for the defence of reseruacion will also impugne this heresie here nowe spoken of Wherfore I referre the reader to that place wher he findinge plentie of proofe that the Sacrament maie be reserued and being reserued that yt still remaineth the bodie of Chryst this wicked doctrine that teacheth that yt ys but the bodie of Chryst when yt ys in vse shal be ouerthrowen and prooued as it is a false and a deuellish doctrine The other heresie which ys settfurth both by the Lutherans and the Oecolampadians ys that the substance of bread and wine be still remaining in the Sacrament and not chaunged into the bodie and bloode of Chryst And yet here by the waie vnderstand this that though they agree in this poinct yet here Sathan ys deuided against Sathan and his kingdom also Diuision among the Protestantes as kingdom against kingdom For Luther graunteth the presence of Chrystes bodie Oecolampadius denieth the presence of Chrystes bodie and in this they are more then enemies But in the other as ys saied they doe agree And as in this they agree amonge themselues So in the same they disagree from the true faith from the catholike Church and from Gregorie Nissen whom we haue nowe in hand For by expresse woordes he affirmeth that the substance of the bread ys chaunged into the bodie of Chryst These be his woordes speaking of the bread before the consecracion Hic panis statim per verbum in corpus mutatur This bread ys by the woorde furthwith Greg. Niss in vita Moiseos chauÌ„ged into the bodie Who so listeth maie read the like saing of the same authour in his booke of the life of Moyses Neither doeth he here meen of soche a chaunge as the Aduersarie dreameth of that yt ys chaunged to be called the bodie of Chryste whiche proprely ys no chaunge but raither an addicion But this authour meeneth of a substanciall chaunge as hys woords doe most plainlie declare which he vseth to proue this chaunge For thus he saieth Qua ex causa panis in eo corpore mutatus in diuinam virtutem transiit eadem de causa idem nunc fit By what cause bread in that bodie chaunged passed into the diuine vertue euen so by the same cause the verie same thing ys now doen. For the better weighing of this saing of the authour consider first that Chryste was and ys bothe God and man consider that the bodie of man was so ioined to the Godhead in vnitie of person that Chryst God and man was one person one Chryste Consider then that this bodie by this merueilouse coniunction ys the bodie of God Nowe this bodie liuing here vpon the earth although as yt liued fortie daies and fortie nightes wihout foode so yt might haue liued fortie wekes and fortie moneths yet as yt was a naturall bodie So yt liued in natural order and did eate foode This foode which by a generall terme ys called bread allthough yt were but comon meate euen soche as the Apostles and other did eate yet this comon bread eateÌ„ of Chryst was chaunged in the bodie of Chryst into the substance of the bodie of Chryst and became now the substance of his bodie and being so yt came to be the substance of the bodie of God Nowe saieth Gregbrie Nissen by what cause the bread was chaunged into the bodie of Chryste and became the substance of the bodie of God As bread while Chryst liued was turned into his diuine flesh so nowe in the Sacr. which as I take yt he meneth by these woordes diuine vertue euen by the same cause the same thing ys nowe doen. Yf the same thing be doen nowe then the bread ys chaunged into the substance of the bodie of God for that ys the thing that was doen then Wherfor good reader note this wel that he saieth the same thing ys doen nowe wherbie the dreame of the Aduersarie ys dissolued that the bread ys chaunged but in name For that was but a cauill and in dede but a bare shifte to auoide the force of the trueth And what the thing ys that nowe ys doen thys authour tolde when he saied Panis mutatur in corpus per verbum The bread by the worde ys chaunged into the bodie Seing then this auncient

certentie also of this matter ys added when he saieth that we eate the lambe wherby he meneth the Lambe that taketh awaie the sinnes of the worlde Iesus Chryst that innocent Lambe figured by the olde Paschall lambe Likewise saing that we eat the flesh of the shepe he meneth the flesh of Chryst who ys he Qui tanquam ouis ad occisionem ducebatur tanquam agnus coram se tondente obmutescebat non aperiebat os suum who as a shepe was ledde to Esay 53. be slain and as a lambe before the sherer did holde his peace and did not open his mouthe Finallie that in this discourse he speaketh of the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie in the Sacrament and that we verilie and substanciallie receaue yt and be nourished with yt his last woordes doe inuinciblie prooue Sinners receaue the bodie of Chryst in the Sacr. not spirituallie but yet reallie In whiche mouing a question vpon the woordes before saied he saieth Quam satisfact c. what maner of amendes or satisfaction shall we make to him that being in sinne doe receaue soche foode that being wolues doe eate the lambe that being lions doe rauine the flesh of the shepe Nowe certen yt ys both by the doctrine of the Catholique and the Protestant that the sinner eateth not the bodie of Chryst spirituallie wherfore yt must needes be that soche as being wolues and lions in wickednesse of life and doe yet by the doctrine of Chrysostom eate the flesh of the lambe and deuoure the flesh of the shepe forasmoch as ys saied that they doe not eate the flesh of Chryst spirituallie that they eate yt in the Sacrament reallie and substanciallie For this ys well knowen to the Aduersarie that the euell man can not receaue Chrystes bodie but in the Sacrament But Chrysostom saieth that the euell man receaueth the bodie of Chryst Wherfor in the Sacrament Thus if my iudgement fail me not Chrysostom hath by expresse woordes taught vs the reall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament Nowe we shall Reall presence auonched of Chrysost bi circunstaÌ„ce heare him teach the same by circunstance but so plainlie and euidently that yt can not be against saied The circunstance consisteth in the comparison of the Paschall Lambe and in the woordes of Chryste the sixt of S. Iohn by whiche both he prooueth these woordes of Chryst This ys my bodie to be spoken in their propre sense and to teach vs the reall presence of Chryst in the Sacrament The woordes be these Praecipuam eorum solemnitatem dissoluit ad aliam mensam horroris plenam eos conuocat dicens Accipite comedite Chrys homil 83. in 16. Math. Hoc est corpus meum QuomodÃ² igitur turbati non sunt hoc audientes quia multa magna de hoc antea audierant He dissolueth their cheif Solemnitie and to an other table full of terriblenesse he calleth them saing This ys my bodie Howe then were they not troobled hearing this bicause he had spoken manie and great thinges of this before Thus he In this saing two thinges breiflie noted I passe to the next place The first ys that the other table wherunto Chryst did call his Apostles was full of terriblenesse or trembling whiche sheweth that ther was in that table aboue the table of the Paschall lambe from the whiche they were called some thing that was of soche maiestie that yt was to be feared whiche thing was Table of the old Paschal lambe not terrible as onelie but a figure the table of Chryst ys terrible aÌ„d therfor more then a figure not in the other table In the other table was the Paschall lambe a liuelie figure of Chryst our Paschall lambe and in yt Chryst was figuratiuely eaten And although yt were their cheifest solemnitic yet Chrysostom doth not call yt a fearfull table Yf then in that solemne table ther was the figure of Chryst and Chryst was ther figuratiuely eaten and yet that table was not terrible or ful of horroure then in the table of Chryst ys not onelie a figure of Chryst and Chryst figuratiuelie eaten but ther ys a great matter ther that maketh this table to be fearfull What ys that Hoc est corpus meum This ys my bodie For Chrysostom saieth that when Chryst called them to this table he saied This ys my bodie Yf these woordes This ys my bodie did no more but cause the figure of Chrystes bodie to be in the table of Chryst and so Chryste to be eaten in a figure as he was in the table of the Paschall Lambe theÌ„ this table had ben no more full of horroure then the other But for so moche as by that sainge of Chryst the table was full of horroure yt argueth as before yt ys alleaged oute of Chrysostome that he so saing with the woorde made also the thing so that as he spake the woorde presentlie so the thing that ys his bodie was ther presentlie For the saing of the woorde and the making of the thing went iointlie togeather Wherby then as yt doth plainly appeare that the bodie of Chryst was present in that table so also dothe yt appeare that the bodie being made present at the saing of these woordes This ys my bodie that these woordes are to be taken and vnderstanded in their propose sense The second note ys that wher Chrysostome moueth a question saing how were not the Apostles troobled when they heard Chryst saie Take eate This ys my bodie He aunswereth that they were not troobled bycause they had heard him speake manie and great thinges of this thing before Wher this vs to be noted that Chryst did not speake moche of this matter but onely in the sixt of sainct Iohns Gospell Nowe yt ys allready prooued that ther Chryst spake of his flesh and his bloode Then if he speaketh here of that he spake of ther then he saing This ys my bodie this ys bloode speaketh here of his verie flesh and verie bloode And so these woordes must be vnderstanded in their propre sense And here ys to be remeÌ„bred that the author of Cranmers booke growndeth CraÌ„mers argument agunst the Sacrament an argument as he supposeth vpon a good grownde but in verie dede yt ys vpoÌ„ the sande against the Sacrament saing that if Chryst had made his bodie in the Sacrament yt being so great a woorke so great a misterie yt shoulde haue ben declared either by Chryst himself shewing the verie thing so to be or by the Euangelistes in processe of the storie or of the cirumstance But for somoche as the Gospell saieth no more but Sacramentaries denie the vi of S. Iohn tospeake of the Sacr. that yt should appeare a matter of no weight breiflie without all preuiall disposition to the doing of the thinge and without all circumstance that he tooke bread and gaue thankes and brake yt and gaue yt to his Disciples saing Take eate This ys my bodie c. Therfor saieth

thought good first to note that being ioinctlie spoken of after the other the first might be corfirmed by this in that that this openeth the place of the speaking of yt And this by that manie somwhat be explained in that yt declareth that Chryst spake ther manie and great thinges which in this place be not so farre reported Ther seemeth betwixpt these two places of Chrysostom to be a contradiction the dissolucion of whiche shall bringfurth some good matter meit for Two sainges of Chrysost conferred and conciled this place The contradiction ys this in the first sentence saing QuomodÃ² igitur turbati non sunt discipuli hoc audientes howe were the disciples not troobled hearing this he geueth vs to vnderstand that the Apostles were so staied and confirmed that when Chryst spake to them comaunding them to eate his bodie they were not neither coulde be troobled In this sentence he saieth thatChryst did first drinke of his bloode lest they shoulde saie Wherfor then doe we drinke blood and eate slesh and therfor shoulde be troobled Wherby contrariwise he semeth to insinuate that they were not perfect but wolde haue ben troobled But these two sainges well weighed ther shall be fownde no contradiction but raither strong euident matter for the opening of the trueth nowe declared Wherfor this ys to be noted that in the sirst sentence Chrysostom spake of the faith of the Apostles as concerning this misterie And as touching their saith they were not troobled at the straunge sownde of Chrystes woordes who bid them take and eate his bodie and drinke his blode who otherwise if they had not ben staied in faith being fullie instructed and fullie perswaded they wolde haue ben troobled at the hearing of soche woordes but they were resolued and therfor wolde not depart and go backe from Chryste as other disciples did but when Chryst asked them will yowe also go awaie They answered Domine ad quem ibimus verba vitae aeternae habes Lorde to whom shall we go Thowe hauest the woordes of euerlasting life They had taken a good tast in the woordes of Chryst though they were repugnaunt to their naturall knowledge Wherfor they subdewed their naturall The Apostles hearing Chystes woordes Take eate this ys my bodie were not troobled in faith knowledge to the heauenly and spirituall knowledge and so perceaued euerlasting life in his woordes Therfore hearing this newe and straunge voice Take eate This ys my bodie Drinke this ys my blood that yt was so in dede as Chrvst spake they beleued most certenlie And therfor in faith they were not troobled For if they had they wolde haue vttered their doubte with a QuomodÃ² howe as they did that were troobled and saied QuomodÃ² potest hic nobis dare carnem suam ad manducandum Howe can this felowe geue vs his flesh to eate And as our men in these daies trobled likewise in faith doe shewe their doubte with a QuomodÃ² with an howe asking howe can Chryst be in the Sacrament with manie soche like questions But the Apostles were deliuered from this trooble and therfor saieth Chrysostom they were not trobled that ys they were not troobled in faith That he meneth they were not troobled in faith his woordes doe declare when he asketh howe were not the Apostles troobled hearing these woordes So that their troble shoulde be vpon the hearing of Chrystes woordes But forasmoche as faith ys of hearing and by hearing Chryst before they had conceaued faith therfor faith by the hearing of these woordes which before by hearing were beleued was not nowe troobled Whiche also this Chrysostome saieth in his answer geuing a cause why they were not trobled Quia multa magna de hoc antÃ¨ disseruerat Bicause he had spoken manie and great thinges of this before so that by the hearing of these manie and great thinges they were nowe quieted in faith In the seconde sentence wher he sheweth a thing to be doen by Chryst lest they shoulde be troobled he doth not speake of their trooble in faith but of their trooble that mighthaue happened in the execucioÌ„ of their faith that ys in the receauing of that bodie and bloode whiche they beleued ther to be reallie present and as verie flesh and verie bloode to be receaued The Apostles beleued the real presence of Chrystes bodie and blood in the Sacr. Wherfor yt ys to be noted that the Apostles beleued in the Sacrament to be not a bare figure as of thing absent but they beleued the verie bodie and bloode of Chryst really present The proofe of this by Chrysostom ys this Yf they had beleued yt to be but a figure and in very dede bread and wine then in the receipt of yt they wolde not haue ben troobled For vnto bread and wine they were accustomed as their vsuall foode But forasmoch as they beleued yt to be the verie flesh and verie blood of Chryst the receipt wher of being both straunge and to oure nature lothsome and speciallie the flesh and blood of a man as Theophilact saieth therfor as they were not troobled in the beleuing so that they shoulde not be trobled in Chryst to induce his Apost without lothsomnesse to eat his flesh and drinke his blood did first eat aÌ„d drinke theÌ„ himself the receauing of yt Chryst to induce them by his example and to remoue the lothsomnesse of nature abhorring to eate the flesh of man and to drinke his bloode did drinke first vt tranquillo animo saieth Chrysostom ad communicationem mysterioruÌ„ induceret That he might induce them with a quiet minde to receaue the misteries CoÌ„sider with yowr self if they had beleued yt to be but bread whie should thei not receaue yt with quiet mind yf yt were wine why shoulde they not drinke yt quietlie And if they were soche thinges what needed Chryst to drinke before them to induce them and to quiet them Did they neuer eate bread before Did they neuer drinke wine before Perchaunce the Aduersaries will saie that they neuer eate bread and draÌ„ke wine in that sort before For nowe they did eate bread and drinke wine as the figures of Chrystes bodie and bloode Ys this a sufficient cause to trooble them Had they neuer before eaten any thing as the figure of Chryst Had they not euen a litle before eaten the Paschall lambe a verie liuely figure of Chryst Had they not hearde that Melchisedech did eate and drinke bread and wine in the figure of Chryste Had they not heard that Manna was eaten and the water of the rocke dronken in the figure of Chryst Was this matter so straunge to them that they shoulde be trobled No yt was not this but yt was for the eating of the flesh and drinking of the blood of Chryst whiche for that that yt was neuer in vse before yt was very straunge to them and for that yt was against nature yt was lothsome and therfor they might verie well haue ben troobled

That this ys the cause Chrysostome by plain woordes declareth saing Chryst did drinke first of yt lest when they had heard the woordes of Chryste which were these Eate This ys my bodie Drinke This ys my bloode they shoulde saie what doe we eate flesh and drinke bloode and therfor they shoulde be troobled Note that he saieth that the Apostles wolde haue saied whi doe we eat flesh Trooble of the Apost shoulde haue ben bicause they knewe they should eate verie flesh and drinke bloode In the whiche woordes he doth plainlie expresse their faith that they beleued yt to be flesh and bloode And bicause they did certenlie beleue yt to be flesh and bloode and that they shoulde so haue receaued yt yt might haue ben a cause to trooble them Therfor Chrysostom addeth Ac ideo perturbarentur And therfor they shoulde be troobled Therfor that ys bicause they shoulde eate the flesh and drinke the blood of a man Fot that ys the cause that Chrysostom doeth assign of their trooble That whiche foloweth also moche helpeth the declaracion of this matter that when Chryst saieth Chysostom did speake of these thinges before manie for the woordes alonelie were offeÌ„ded In that he saieth that they were offeÌ„ded for the wordes alone he geueth vs to vnderstaÌ„d that the Apostles shoulde not nowe haue beÌ„ offended so but for the doing that where Chryst before did speake of the geuing of his flesh nowe he did both speake of yt and geue yt in dede And so in the receipt of yt in dede they shoulde haue ben offended But saieth Chrysostom that that might not happen he dranke first that they animated and comforted by his example might with a quiett minde neither thinking yt straunge neither lothsome receaue the misteries in the whiche as a mistery requireth was hidden a thinge not open to senseis whiche was the bodie of Iesus Chryste Nowe ye haue heard the minde of Chrysostom vpon the woordes of Chryst and howe he vnderstandeth them yowe maie perceaue and by the same also yowe maie knowe both howe he did beleue and howe also the Apostles who first tooke this misterie at Chrystes hand did beleue And nowe forasmoche as I haue taried long vpon Chrysostom but not without profitt to the reader as I trust I will with the more expedition breislie ouerpasse the breif saing of Sedulius who at this time ys ioined to Chrysostom Sedul in 11 prim Cor. as his yockefelowe to testifie the true vnderstaÌ„ding of Chrystes wordes in the latin churche as Chrysostome hath doen in the greke churche Thus he saieth Accipite hoc est corpus meuÌ„ quasi dixisset Paulus Cauete ne illud corpus A plain place for M. Iuell indignÃ¨ comedatis duÌ„ corpus Chisti est Take this ys my bodie as though Paule had saied Beware that ye eate not that bodie vnworthilie forasmohe as yt ys the bodie of Chryste Thus mochehe Who expownding the woordes of Chryst vttered by S. Paule to the Corinthians dothe by expresse woordes geue vs to vnderstande theÌ„ in their propre sense as speaking of the verie bodie and of no figure or trope For if they were so to be vnderstaÌ„ded this learned man taking vpon him the office of an expositoure and so to expownde the woordes of Chryst and the mening of S. Paule in the alleaging of them wolde haue taught nowe that theie are to be vnderstaÌ„ded by a figure as an expositour aught to doe But forasmohe as he teacheth that they are vndestanded of Chrystes bodie as in opening S. Paules minde yt doeth wel appeare yt can not otherwise be but the woordes Sedulius coÌ„mended of Chryste are to be taken simplie as teaching vs that Cryste and S. Paule spake of the very bodie and not of the bare figure of yt This maÌ„ was both learned and auncient not moche aboue foure hondreth years after Chryste who as by learning he was not voide of good knowledg so by auncientie he was not voide of true faith Wherfor we must nedes confesse that this doctrine ys according to the true faith and so consequentlie acknowledge that yt ys the true faith to beleue Chrystes verie bodie in the Sacrament Thus Reader thowe hauest heard these twoo noble men of Chrystes Parliament The ProclaÌ„er must subscribe to the catholique doctrin of the Church if he will kepe promesse howse openinge to vs the enacted trueth of the vnderstanding of Chrystes woordes bothe of them testifieng the presence of Chrystes bodie by the same woordes and no one title of the Aduersaries figures and signes and that so plainlie and euidentlie that methinke the Proclamer shall doe me wronge if he subscribe not to this trueth for somoche as he hath promised so to doe vpon the seight of anie one plain place in scripture Councell or doctoure Chrysostom I am sure ys so plain and with all so euident and strong against the wicked assertion of the Proclamer that he shall neuer be able with all his engins and false shiftes that he had to withstand his force But yf hys mouthe will not for pride confesse the trueth his conscience I doubte not accuseth him as confownded THE SIX AND FIFTETH CHAP. ABIDETH in the exposition of the same woordes by Theophilus and Leo. NOw gentle Reader coming towardes the ende of these famouse and noble men of Chrystes higher house of Parliament I meen of soche as were within sixe hondreth years after Chryst I trust thowe wilt not fainte to proceade and see the ende And to thy more ease I also as a man trauailing in iourneie and coming towarde the ende being desierouse of the same taketh courage to him and maketh the more hast to atteign his desire Euen so I nowe drawing to the ende will be shorter then I haue ben and so make hast that I maie obtein that that I desire And nowe of those fathers that remain Theoplnlus Archibishoppe of Alexandria Origen his heresic shall be the first that in our matter shall geue his testimonie This man writing against Origen for that he saied that the deuells shall be saued at Theop. Alexand li. 2. pasch the last saieth thus Consequens est vt qui priora susceperit suscipiat quae sequuntur Et qui pro Doemonibus Christum dixerit crucifigi ad ipsos quoque dicendum suscipiat Hoc est corpus meum accipite Hic est sanguis meus Si enim pro Daemonibus crucifigitur vt nouorum dogmatum assertor affirmat quod erit priuilegium aut quae ratio vt soli homines corpori eius sanguiniî€‚ue communicent non Daemones quoque proquibus in passione sanguinem fuderit Yt ys consequent that he that receaueth the first thinges shoulde also receaue those thinges that folowe And he that doeth saie Chryst to be cruicified for Deuels alow also to be saied vnto theÌ„ This ys my bodie and Take this ys my bloode For yf Chryst shall be crucified also for Deuells as the auoucher of newe

earthlie and heauenlie S. Ambrose also hath euen the same woordes that S. Ghregorie hath saing vbi summa imis iunguÌ„tur Wher high thinges be ioined to lowe thinges Heauenlie and earthlie thinges os the Sacr. discussed what they be by confereÌ„ce of thaduersar doctrine Yt shall moche helpe the setting furth of the trueth if we maie conferring with the doctrine of the aduersaries discusse what ys this heauenlie or high thinge that ys ioined in the Sacrament with the eartly thinge And here we must according to the doctrine of Irenaeus first confesse and agree that these twoo thinges of the whiche the Sacrament ys made are twoo permanent thinges twoo thinges standing and abiding Nowe the aduersaries doctrine seking by all means to displace and remoue Chryst from the Sacrament feigneth manie thinges to be the heauenlie parte of the Sacrament which in dede will not stand with the doctrine of Irenaeus In some place yt saieth that the grace of God which cometh to the Grace ys not one of the partes of the Sacr. but the effecte receauers of the Sacrament ys the heauenly parte of the Sacrament This can not stand as part for grace ys the effect of the Sacrament and not the parte And grace therfor must be and ys in the receauer and not in the Sacrament as a part therof For if grace were in the Sacrament as a part of the Sacrament then either vnwoorthie men receauing the SacrameÌ„t receaue grace also which ys not to be saied or ells yt must be saied that forasmoche as they receaue not grace they receaue no Sacrament for a thing ys receaued when yt ys whollie receaued And thus shall they be vncerten when the Sacrament ys ministred Of some yt maie be saied that bicause the Sacrament ys called the bread of thankes geuing that thankes to God ys the heauenly parte of the Sacrament Thankes geuing ys not th one parte of the Sacr. This also can not be For this ys well knowen to all men that haue but reason that thankes geuing ys either in him that geueth them or in him that receaueth them and not in the bread for yt neither geueth nor receaueth thankes Yf they saie bicause S. August saieth Accedit verbuÌ„ ad elementuÌ„ et fit SacramentuÌ„ that ys the woorde cometh to the element and yt ys made a Sacrament The worde ys not that one part of the Sacrament that therfore the woorde ys the heauenly part of the Sacrament That also can not be saied of the Sacrament allreadie consecrated for the woorde ys raither the cause of the Sacrament then the part bicause the woorde ys not a permanent thing but these partes of the Sacrament must be twoo permanent or constant thinges as Irenaeus saieth Yf they will flee to this shifte and saie that though the woorde be not a Sanctificacion of the creaturs caÌ„not be the heauenlie part of the Sacram. by the doctrine of the aduer permanent thing yet the sanctrification that ys doen in the bread by the woorde remaineth and that ys the heauenly part of the Sacrament This also euen by their owne learning can not stande For Oecolampadius and Cranmer and all the rable of that Sect teache constantlie that dumbe thinges be not partakers of sanctificacion Nowe what ells they can feign to maintein their euell matter I can not deuise but of these no one will serue Wherfor leauing them we will hearewhat the catholique faith teacheth to be the heauenly part of the SacrameÌ„t whiche thing we maie easilie doe trauailing no farder then to S. Gregorie whom we haue nowe in hande For we haue heard him saie that Iesus Chryst liuing in himself immortallie and incorruptiblie ys offred for vs in the holie mysterie wher The heaueÌ„lie part of the blessed Sacrament what yt ys his bodie ys receaued wher his flesh ys geuen abroade to the people wher the bloode ys not shedde vpon the haÌ„des of the vnfaithfull but into the mouthes of the faithfull Here maie yowe see the heauenly parte of the Sacrament what yt ys Yt ys verie bodie and bloode of Chryst that ys geuen in the holie misterie to the people yt ys the high thing coopled to lowe thinges yt ys the heauenlie thing ioined to earthlie thinges yt ys that one inuisible thing that ys made one with visible thinges And here note that this place of S. Gregorie can not be wrested to the onely spirituall receauing of Chrystes bodie but yt must be vnderstande of the corporall receipt For he saieth that the blood of Chryst in the Sacramen Corporall receauing of the bodie and blood of Chryste auouched by S. Greg. ys powred into the mouthes of the faitfull whiche maner of receipt ys corporall euen the receipt of Chrystes verie reall and substanciall bloode The other receipt ys onely in the soule and can not be receaued of the bodie Wherfor we maie conclude that he speaketh here of the corporal receipt of Chrystes bloode whiche thing also ys confirmed by that he accompteth all one bloode that was shed vpon the handes of the vnfaithfull and into the mouthes of the faithfull That that was shed vpon the handes of the vnfaithfull Iewes in the passion of Chryst was Chrystes verie reall and substanciall bloode wherfor that that ys receaued by the mouthes of the faithfull ys Chrystes verie substanciall bloode Thus by S. Gregorie we are taught that Chrystes verie bodie and bloode be verilie in the Sacrament whiche so being the catholique doctrine ys that Chrystes bodie and bloode be the heauenly parte of the Sacrament But of both partes distinctlie sainct Bernarde whom onely at this time I will produce dothe verie learnedly speake treacting of the Sacrament in this maner Quemadmodum species ibi videntur quorumres vel substantiae ibi esse non creduntur sic res veraciter substantialiter creditur cuius species non cernitur videntur enim species panis vini sabstantia panis vini non creditur Creditur autem substantia Bernar. de Coen Dom. corporis sanguinis Christi tamen species non cernitur As the formes be ther seen whose thinges or substances be not beleued ther to be so a thing ys verilie and substanciallie beleued whose forme ys not seen For the forme of bread and wine ys seen and the substance of bread and wine ys not beleued Forme of bread seen the substance not beleued substaÌ„ce of Christs bodie beleued the for me not seeÌ„ the substance of the bodie and bloode of Chryst ys beleued and yet the forme ys not seen Again in the same sermon he writeth thus Quod auteÌ„ videmus species est panis vim quod autem sub specie illa credimus verum corpus est verus Christi sanguis quod pependit in cruce qui fluxit de latere That that we see ys the forme of bread and wine but that we beleue vnder the forme ys the verie bodie and verie bloode of Chryst that did

the power of him that brought oute all of nothing Of this authour as of all the rest we learn the power and mightie worke of Chrystes woordes God and man by which the bread and wine be transmuted and chaunged into the bodie and blood of the same owre master aÌ„d Sauiour Iesus Chryst And wher transmutacion and transubstanciacion ys confessed and taught as this authour confesseth bothe ther ys the Aduersaries figure denied and the propre sense of Chrystes woordes and not the figuratiue sense admitted and alowed But we shall heare him with his owne woordes declare himself Thus he saieth Corpus est duplex Verum alterum alterum mysticum Et verum quidem est quod in hoc diuino Eucharistiae sacramento consecratur atque conficitur sub visibili specie panis The true bodie of Chryste vnder the forme of bread ac vini Hoc idem est cum eo corpore quod fuit ex beata Virgine Spiritus sancti obumbratione conceptum De quo ipse Dominus in exhibitione sacramenti cum nobis sensibileÌ„ panem vinumque ostendisset ait Hoc est corpus meuÌ„ hic est sanguis meus Deinde addidit Quod pro vobis traditur qui pro vobis effunditur in remissioneÌ„ peccatoruÌ„ MysticuÌ„ auteÌ„ eius corpus est Ecclesia congregatio fideliuÌ„ Chryst hath two bodies A true bodie and a mysticall bodie The true bodie ys yt that ys coÌ„secrated and made in this diuine Sacrament vnder the visible forme of bread and wine This ys all one with that bodie that was by the ouershadowing of the holie Goste conceaued of the blessed virgen Of which bodie our Lorde himself in the geuing furth of the Sacrament when he had shewed to vs sensible bread and wine saied This ys my bodie and this ys my blood Then he added which ys deliuered for yowe and whiche ys shed for yowe in the remission of sinnes But his mysticall bodie ys the Church and the congregacion of the faithfull And afterward by expresse woordes denieng the Aduersaries figure saieth thus Cauendum autem ne quis propterea quÃ²d Eucharistiae mysterium figura esse dicitur A great blasphemie to saie or thinke the Sacr. ys not the bodie of our Lord. dicere aut omnino suspicari audeat non esse verum Domini corpus Absit tanta blasphemia Ã fidelium mentibus Yt ys diligentlie to be taken heed vnto that no man bicause the Sacrament ys called a figure be so bolde to saie or by anie meanes to thinke that yt ys not the verie bodie of our Lorde God forbidde so great a blasphemie from the mindes of the faithfull Thus farre he In whiche saing as before diuerse times ys saied the authour according to the catholique faith teacheth that the Sacrament ys both a figure and the bodie of Chryst But bicause yt ys a figure therfore as the Aduersarie saieth yt ys not the bodie of Chryste That blasphemie saieth this good man God kepe from the mindes of the faithfull Beholde Chrystian reader that to saie that the Sacrament ys a figure and not the verie bodie of Chryst yt ys a blasphemie O mercifull Lord howe moche blasphemie then ys ther nowe committed God of his mercie preserue soche as yet haue not that they neuer speake blasphemie against ther Lorde God in this matter and call again soche as haue that his heauie indignacion fall not vpon vs. I see I haue taried long vpon these fewe woordes of Chryst And therfore although I might haue brought furth manie moo of the lower house as the learned knowe ther be manie yet I haue of them takeÌ„ but sixe cooples remembring that I had a good nombre of the higher howse and they mynistred moche occasion of matter vpon which I had better will to tarie bicause the Proclamer aloweth their authoritie Who in dede if he will looke well vpon himself and will thinke no more of himself then ys meet nor take more vpon him then becometh him shoulde not with skorn and contumelie reiect anie of these of the lower house nor disalowe soch learned men as he doeth and soche a nombre and of so long time and so manie yeares except MisunderstaÌ„ding of Chrystes woordes mother of all the heresies of the Sacramentaries he doeth yt vpon like policie as some men doe who mystrusting their cause refuse manie to go vpon their questes bicause they shall be fownde giltie I haue I saie taried long vpon this short text and fewe woordes of Chryst bicause the misunderstanding of them whiche ys the mainteinance of their heresie and the mother and damme of all the wicked opinions in this matter maie be taken awaie and the true vnderstanding whiche ys the grownde of true faithe and the verie fowntain and liuelie well spring of whollsom doctrine maie be staied settled and with like mindes of men to be receaued For he that hath the true vnderstanding of the woordes of Chryst can not lightlie erre in the matters of the Sacrament And he that misunderstandeth them for the most parte erreth in all matters that be moued by euell men against the blessed Sacrament Nowe ye haue heard first the three holie Euangelistes and S. Paule reporting in one maner those woordes of Chryst ye haue heard eleuen cooples of Chrystes higher house of parliament of eche side that ys both of the greke Churche and latine Church men not obscure but most famouse among all writers that haue written vpon these woordes of Chryst not onelie in learning but in auncientie Catholiques howe they vnderstand Chrystes woordes in holinesse and in grauitie ye haue heard sixe cooples of Chrystes lower howse of Parliament chosen also of both sides of the howse men also in their times famouse both in learning in holinesse of life and in my iudgement most woorthie men I saie amonge those that I coulde finde that did treact of the woordes of Chryst by waie of exposition In the processe also ye haue hearde the propositions or saynges of the catholiques and of the aduersarye as touching the vnderstanding of these woordes of Chryst wherin standeth the controuersie The catholiques haue twoo saynges The one that the woordes of Chryst are to be vnderstanded withoute figure The other Sacramentaries howe they vnderstaÌ„d them whiche foloweth vpon that that Chryst spake of his verie bodie The Aduersaries contrarie wise haue two sainges the one that Chrystes woordes are to be vnderstanded with a figure The other that Chryst did not speake these woordes of his verie bodie The catholique vpoÌ„ his sainges growndeth this trueth that Chrystes verie bodie and verie bloode after the coÌ„secracion be reallie and substanciallie in the Sacrament and so geuen to the receauers The aduersarie vpon his sainges growndeth his erroure that Chrystes verie bodie and blood be not reallie and substanciallie in the SacrameÌ„t but in the SacrameÌ„t ys onelie a figure of the bodie and ys geueÌ„ to the receauers as a signe or tokeÌ„ of Chryst As coÌ„cerning

the bodie of Chryst And before the woordes of Chryst yt ys a cuppe full of water and wine but when the woordes of Chryst haue wrought ther ys made the bloode that redemed the people Gregorie nissen saied the bread by the woorde ys chaunged into the bodie as yt was saied of the woorde mening Chryst This ys my bodie And again he saieth we doe beleue that the bread sanctified by the woorde of God ys chaunged into Greg. Niss ser cathec Hier. ad Hed. qn 2 Isich in Leuit li. 6. ca. 22. the bodie of the Sonne of God S. Hierom saied Let vs vnderstand that the bread which our Lorde gaue vnto his Disciples ys the bodie of our Lorde and Sauionre forasmoch as he saied This ys my bodie aÌ„d that the cuppe ys that of the whiche again he saied Drinke ye all of this This ys my blood of the newe Testament Isichius saied he receaueth the sacrifice by ignorance that knoweth not the power and dignitie of yt that knoweth not that yt ys his bodie and Ang. in Psalm 33. con 1. Chrysosthom 83. in 26 Math. hom 51. in 14 Marc Cyrill ad CalosyriuÌ„ bloode in verie dede but receaueth the misteries and knoweth not the power of theÌ„ S. Augustine saied that Chryst was born in his owne handes when geuing furth that same his bodie he saied This ys my bodie For he did beare that bodie in his handes Chrysostome saied Forasmoche as he hath saied this ys my bodie let vs be holden with no doubte but let vs beleue and with the eies of our vderstanding let vs verilie see yt Again he saied He that saied This ys my bodie alltogether with his woorde he made the thing also S. Cyrill saied Doubte not whether this be true or no sith he manifestlie saieth this ys my bodie but raither receaue the woorde of our Saiouur in faith For he forasmoche as he ys the trueth he lieth not S. Gregorie saied Chryst ys offred for vs in this misterie of the holie sacrifice Ther trulie his bodie ys receaued his flesh to the health of the people ys geuen abroade his Grego li. 4. Dial. ca 58 blood ys nowe shedde not vpon the handes of the vnfaithfull but into the mouthes of the faithfull And again whiche of the faithfull can doubte in that time of the sacrifice at the woorde of the preist the heauens to be opened in that misterie of Iesu Chryst coÌ„panies of Angells to be preseÌ„t vnto high thinges lowe thinges to be coopled vnto heauenly thinges earthlie thinges to be ioined one thing also of inuisible and visible thinges to be made Isidor saied The sacrifice that ys offred of the Chrystians vnto God Chryst our Lorde and master did first institute when he gaue to his Apostles his bodie and bloode before he wolde be betraied as yt ys redde in the Gospell Jsidorus de â—ffi â—ccl ca 1â— Iesus tooke bread and the cuppe and blessing them gaue them to them Thus haue I breissie tocuhed so moche as maie serue to prooue the second proposition of the catholiques Yf anie desire to see anie more of these authours let him repair to their chapters and ther shall he see them at large And nowe ye see that as by manie wittnesses the figure in the first proposition was denied so by all these that Chryst in his woordes spake of his verie bodie yt ys here affirmed And yet all these notwithstanding yf the Aduersarie can bringe furth but one auncient Father that by expresse woordes saieth as he saieth that Chryst in his supper did not speake of his bodie or that his bodie after coÌ„secracioÌ„ duelie doeÌ„ ys not in the Sacrament I will ioine with him The Proclaimer more arrogantlie theÌ„ trulie saieth of the catholique Churche and that with repeticioÌ„ saing once again I saie as therby with The bragge of the proclamer boldecountenance to beare oute his fal shood and vntrueth that of all the woordes of the holie scriptures of all the examples of the primitiue Churche of all the olde fathers of all the anncient doctours in these causes they haue not one Nowe iudge whether he be true or no and what credditte ys to be geueÌ„ vnto him in other matters that so shameleslie speaketh in this To the farder proofe of the trueth of Chrystes substanciall presence in the Sacrament also beside that that ys saied of manie of the authours seuerallie I haue treacted of tansubstancion wherfor I remitte the reader thither and nowe hauing but one scripture in the Euangelistes to speake of I will breiflie touche yt and so finish this second booke THE FIVE AND SIXTETH CHAP. TREACTETH of the bread blessed and geuen by Chryst to the two disciples in Emaus and prooueth by Theophilact and Bede that yt was the Sacrament IN the gospell after sainct Luke we read that Chryst ioining him self to two of his Disciples goinge to Emaus wheÌ„ he cam thither Luc. 24. he satte downe with them And tooke bread and blessed and brake yt and gaue yt to them and their eies were opened and they knewe him And these Disciples returned with ioie to Hierusalem and tolde the The bread geuen to the Disciples in Emaus was Chrystes blessed bodie Apostles what was doen in the waie and howe they knewe him in the breaking of bread This bread that was here blessed and broke and geuen to the Disciples the holie learned men do testifie not to be common bread but to be by the blessing of Chryst made the bread of life euen his owne bodie Wherfor seinge yt ys so vnderstaÌ„ded I thought yt apperteining to that pourpose that I haue taken in hande to see the mindes of the holie fathers in yt And at this time to ascende I will beginne with Theophilact who writeth thus vpon the same scripture Insinuatur autem aliud quiddam nempe quod oculi corum qui benedictum panem assumunt aperiuntur vt agnoscant illum Magnam enim Theophil in 24. Luc. indicibilem vim habet caro Domini An other thing also ys geuen vs to vnderstande that ys that the eies of theÌ„ which doe take the blessed bread are opened that they maie knowe him mening Chryst For the flesh of Chryst hath a great and vnspeable power Thus he By this authour yt doeth not onely appeare that Chryst gaue vnto the two disciples his bodie but yt ys also euident For when he had first saied that their eies were opened that receaued the blessed bread so well that they might knowe Iesus immediatelie opening what this blessed bread was he saieth For the slesh of Chryst hath an vnspeakeable power The blessed bread then blessed of Chryste to be geuen to the Disciples was so of him blessed by the testimonie of Theophilact that yt was made the flesh of Chryst Whiche he prooueth by the effecte For although Chryst had walked with them somoche waie and had conferred with them and had rebuked their slacknesse of faith and

accipiunt sanguinem autem redemptionis nostrae haurire omnino declinant Quod ideo vestram volumus scire sanctitatem vt vobis huiusmodi homines ijs manisestentur indicijs quorum depraehensa fuerit sacrilega simulatio notati proditi Ã sanctorum societate sacerdotali authoritate pellantur They with drawe them selues from the Sacrament of the health of man And as they denie Chryst our Lorde to be borne in the veritie of our nature So doe they not beleue him to haue ben verilie dead and risen again And therfor doe they condemne the daie of our health and gladnesse with the sadnesse of their fasting Manichies fasted on the sundaie And when to couer their infidelitie they are so bolde to be at the ministracion of our mysteries to the entent they maie be the longer vnknowen they tempre themselues so in the communion of the Sacramentes That with vnwoorthie mouthe they receaue the bodie of Chryst but to drinke A plain place for reall presence against the Proclamer the bloode of our redemption they vtterlie refuse Whiche thing we will your holinesse to vnderstande that these maner of men by these tokens maie be knowen and whose sacrilegall dissimulacion ys perceaued being disclosed and noted they maie be by the preistlie authoritie banished from the so cietie or felowshippe of true Chrystian people In these woordes ye maie learn the heresies of the Manicheis ye maie perceaue their wicked dissimulacion ye maie vnderstand the verie cause whie they wolde not receaue the Sacrament vnder the forme of wine finallie ye maie perceaue to what pourpose bothe kindes were commaunded to be receaued namely that soche cloaked heretiques might by soche means be disclosed and knowen Nowe Gelasius succeading this man and finding this of springe of vipers not yet destroied he folowed him in pronowncing against them as he did folowe him in time and gouernement and saied thus Comperimus Gelasius autem quÃ²d quidam sumpta tantÃ¹m sacri corporis portione Ã calice sacrati cruoris abstineant qui procul dubiÃ² quoniam nescio qua superstitione docentur astringi aut integra Sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur quia diuisio vnius eiusdemî€‚ue mysterij sine grandi facrilegio non potest peruenire We certenlie finde that certain men when they haue receaued the porcion of the holie bodie they doe abstein from the cuppe of the holie bloode who forasmoche as I knowe not by what supersticion they are taught so to be Porcion of the holie bodie and cuppe of the holie blood witholden let them without all doubte either receaue the wholl Sacramentes or ells let them be forbidden from the wholl For the diuision of one verie mysterie can not be doen withoute great sacriledge Thus he Nowe yf ye will referre this sentence of Gelasius to the sentence of Leo ye shall perceaue that Gelasius writeth not against the doing of the catholique Churche receauing the Sacrament vnder one kinde But against the Manychies who by their heresie diuided the blessed mysterie of Chryst and teaching that he had but a phantasticall bodie denied anie verie blood to be in yt And therfor in their dissembling maner receauing one kinde as a Sacrament of soche phantasticall bodie as they phantasied him to haue they refused the other kinde as a Sacrament of his bloode and so in their conceat they diuided the bloode from the bodie and so diuided the mysterie whiche as Gelasius saieth can not be doen withoute great sacrilege which thing euery good catholique affirmeth and embraceth For yf ye will call to remembrance yt ys declared in the last chapiter that the catholique Churche teacheth that the verie bodie and bloode of Chryst euen wholl Chryst God and man ys vnder eche kinde so that we Doctrine of the catholike churche touching eche kinde of the Sacr. make no diuision of the bodie from the bloode or of the bloode from the bodie or of the godhead from the manheade or of the manhead from the godhead but we teache the wholl verie bodie and the wholl verie bloode whol God and wholl man iointelie to be in these Sacramentes of Chrystes bodie and bloode albeit the one ys more principallie the Sacrament of his bodie and the other more principallie the Sacrament of his bloode Weigh then therfor that these sainges were not spoken against Catholiques but against heretiques that by their wicked heresie diuided the bloode of Chryst from his bodie phantasieng him a bodie withoute bloode whiche in dede ys a great sacriledge Seing then yt ys spoken against soche maner of heretiques whie doeth this Proclamer so wrest and wring this Authour to make him appeare to the vnlearned that he spake against the catholique vse of one kinde in the Churche when the Authour hath not one title against yt Bothe kindes were commaunded to be vsed But whie Not that one kinde were not sufficient but that those heretiques as Leo saieth might therby be knowen and therfor was yt expedient at that time to be commaunded to the confutacion of that heresie as in the Councells of constance and Basill yt was expedient to be doen vnder one kinde for the confutacion of soche heresies as Wycleff and Husse had raised And as these thinges haue ben altered as yt hath ben thought good to the Churche for the wealth of Gods people and the confutacion of his enemies So ys this commaunded but for a time and maie be altered as occasion shall serue but not by euerie priuate man but by the Church onelie But will ye besides all this wresting of this Authour see also the synceritie or raither the false sleight of this Proclamer who to deceaue his audience wolde not faithfullie bring in the whol saing of the Authour as I haue nowe doen. But brought in half a skore of the last woordes and left oute I thinke I maie saie of verie pourpose an wholl skore that go before bycause they made so moche against him that he durst not for shame bring them whollie in For in the former woordes be two thinges verie plainlie taught against Gelasius truncatlie alleaged by the Proclamer auoucheth two thinges against him whiche he concealed him The first ys the verie reall presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode in that he so reuerentlie calleth the Sacrament vnder one kinde the porcion of the holie bodie and the other he calleth the cuppe of the holie bloode As this ys spoken reuerentlie So ys yt spoken plainlie For when he saieth that they abstein from the cuppe of the holie bloode he plainlie teacheth that the content of the cuppe ys holie bloode which holie blood ys not mere spirituall For that as yt ys diuerse times saied ys not conteined in extern or outwarde materiall vessells but in the inwarde spirituall vessells And although this one parte of the Authours sainge whiche the Proclamer left oute doeth prooue the reall presence Yet marke an other as affectuall as this whiche ys that he saieth that

Manna was froÌ„ the aier Christe our bread ys from heauen the figure For wher the bread of the Iewes was but froÌ„ the aier our bread Christe ys from heauen in dede and not from heauen as a comon heauenlie thing but from heauen as a thing heauenlie as the Father ys heauenly and withall not as a coÌ„mon bread but as a bread that ys proprelie called and ys heauenlie bread in verie dede bicause yt confirmeth and maketh strong the heart of man And yet immediatelie by expresse woordes this authour declareth as a cause why that MaÌ„na was not the trewe bread and speaketh yt in the person of Chryst Siquidem panis ille siguratiuus erat me inquit praesigurans Manna a figure of Chryste oure bread In 6. Joan. hom 44. qui sum ipsa veritas For that bread was a figuratiue bread prefigurating me saieth Chryst whiche am the treuth yt self Here vnto agreablie also saieth Chrysostome Panem autem simpliciter non verum illum appellat non quÃ²d falsus esset in Manna miraculum sed quÃ²d figura esset non veritas He calleth yt onelie bread and not the true bread not that in Manna was a false miracle but bicause yt was a figure and not the veritie Nowe then as in the woordes of Chryst comparing and also preferring him self before and aboue the bread that the Iewes had vnder Moises in the desert he declareth him self to be the thing figured by that breade and that bread to be the figure so haue ye hearde these learned men expownding this scripture to teache the like or raither the verie same Yf nowe the aduersarie will obiecte and saie that Manna was a figure of the Godhead but not of his Manhead and so consequentlie not of his bodie for that these textes and scriptures speake of the deitie or God head of John 6. Euthim. ibidem Chryst and not yet of his humanitie as Euthimius whom we haue alleaged doeth also testifie expownding this saing of Chryst Ego sum panis vitae I am the bread of life Panis viuificans qui vt dictuÌ„ est dat vitaÌ„ aeternaÌ„ NaÌ„ ea proprie dicitur vita quae aeterna est Quae enim ad teÌ„pus durat noÌ„ vita est sed vitae imago Panem auteÌ„ vitae suaÌ„ vocat diuinitateÌ„ SiquideÌ„ ipsa panis est quae de caelo descendit I am the bread of life the bread that maketh to liue aÌ„d which as yt ys saied geueth eternal lif For that proprelie ys called life which ys euerlasting That that endureth but for a time yt ys not life but an image of life The bread of life he calleth his Godhead For yt ys the bread that descended from heauen Thus Euthim. Yt ys true that all that Chryste hath spoken of him self hitherto sithen he began to speake of Manna ys spoken of his Godhead For so dothe Chrysostome also wittnesse And therfor we accept that that Euthimius saieth and graunt the same But then I wold ye weÌ„t to the next line of Euthymius aÌ„d read Euthim. what he addeth to this sentence that ys nowe oute of him alleaged Yt foloweth ther immediatelie Tandem verÃ² etiam corpus panem vocat Afterwarde also he calleth his dodie bread Whiche he doth when he saieth And the bread Chryste called bread two waies whiche I will geue ys my flesh whiche I will geue for the life of the worlde vpoÌ„ the which text he saieth Duobus modis Christus dicitur esse panis secundÃ¹m diuinitatem scilicet bumanitatem Postquam ergo docuit de modo qui secundÃ¹m Diuinitatem est nunc etiaÌ„ docet de modo qui est secundÃ¹m humanitateÌ„ Two maner of waies Chryste ys saied to be bread that ys to saie after his Godhead and after his Manheade Therfore after he hath taught of the maner whiche ys after his Godhead nowe also he teacheth of that maner whiche ys after his Manhead Thus then yt ys manifest Chryste him self teaching and Euthimius Chrysostom with diuerse other so declaring as ye maie see in the second booke wher the sixt chapter of S. Iohn ys by a nombre of learned Fathers expownded that Chrystes bodie ys called bread and yerie well both for that by that name yt aunfwereth the figure And also as Manna fedde the Iewes so in a more excellent maner the bodie of Chryste feadeth the Chrystians he him self witnessing and speaking of his owne bodie thus Qui manducat Joan. 6. hunc panen viuet in aeternum He that eathe this bread shall liue for euer And here I can but merueill at the maliciouse blindnesse of Oecolampadius who trauaileth by all means to proue that the bodie of Chryst feadeth not the soule and so wolde make Chryst contrarie to him self bothe in this sentence last alleaged and also in this sentence wher he faieth Caro mea verÃ¨ est Jbid. â— cibus sanguis meus verÃ¨ est potus My flesh ys meat in dede and my bloode ys drinke in dede But Oecolam wolde haue that the soule ys fedde onely whith the worde of God and faith and therfor speaking of the flesh of Chryste he saith Neque opus est carnem in ipsam ingredi animam Quod ne imaginaremur satis cauerat Dominus dicens Caro non prodest quicquam Neither yt ys nedefull that the flesh entre into the soule whiche thing that we shoulde not imagen the lord did diligently prouide sainge The flesh profitetb nothinge And yet Chryste saieth Except ye eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood ye haue no life in yowe I am loath as in the prouerbe yt ys saied Actum agere to doo that thing In the xxxvi chap. c. that ys doen all readie and so with prolixitie and tediousnes to greue the readie Wherfor all these scriptures of the sixt chap. of S. Iohn being sufficiently declared in the second booke and among other this text whiche Oecolampadius bringeth inwhiche ys The flesh profiteth nothing ther truly by S. Augustine Chrysostom Theophilact and other expownded and declared to be of an other maner of sense then he deuilishlie wolde wrest yt to and ther also being shewed howe the flesh of Chryst feadeth and profiteth the soule very moche I shall referr the reader thither wher he shall finde Oecolampadius fullie aunswered and matter sufficient I trust wherwith he him self shall be satisfied Wherfor nowe I will but touche a woorde of Oecolampadius wher he saieth that the inwarde man ys fedde by faithe Yt ys a maner of feede that I haue not redd in anie autentike authour But this maie be and ys red that Chryst and his woorde receaued by faith doth feed the soule but not faithe yt self Neither haue I red anie catholique authour that Jnward maÌ„ ys fedde by â—aith the glose of OecolaÌ„p touched teacheth that the flesh of Chryst entreth in to the soule as yt liketh Oecolampadius whith his feigned speache

your eares for they heare Chryst was not ignorant that their soules did see and heare as the cause principall and yet he asscribeth the effect to the eye and to the eare by the which as by her organs she doth see and heare The scripture also vseth both these maner of speaches Sainct Paule saieth SecundÃ¹m suam misericordiam saluos nos fecit per lauacrum regenerationis renouationis spiritus sancti According to his mercie he hath saued vs by Tit. 3. the fowntain of regeneracion and the renouacion of the holie Gost In the whiche maner of sainge sainct Paule declareth that our saluacion commeth from God as from the cause principall and by Baptisme as the cause instrumentall Sainct Peter speaking of the Arke of Noe in the whiche Noe and his children were saued as the figure of Baptisme by the which we are saued saieth Nunc similis formae saluos vos facit Baptisma Nowe in like maner baptisme saueth yowe In which maner of speach doth 1. Pet. 3. not sainct Peter asscribe saluacion to Baptisme Yet was not he ignorant who was the principall cause of our saluacion Nowe what ys yt to saie that baptisme saueth vs but that baptisme geueth vs grace of remission of our sinnes what then do we offende to speake as the scripture doth and to saie that the sacramentes geue grace Doth S. Peter robbe God and Chryst of his honour bicause he doth asscribe saluacion to baptisme No no more dothe the Churche in saing that sacramentes geue grace Both be vprightlie spoken and Gods honour vprightlie saued Yf then as S. Paule saieth we be saued by Baptisme and as S. Peter saieth Baptisme saueth vs and by the sacramentes of the old lawe no man was saued neither did they saue anie man Nam neminem ad perfectum adduxit Lex for the lawe brought no man to perfection then yt maie be concluded that our sacramentes are more excellent then the sacramentes of the olde lawe Neither can Oecolampadius hys wicked glose stand to peruert the true definicion OecolaÌ„p his wicked glose of the woord cause coÌ„futed of a sacrament Causa non ad efficientiam sed ad significantiae euidentiam referri debet Cause saieth he ought to be referred not to the efficiencie or woorking of the effect but to the euidence of significacion For as Roffensis both well and learnedlie saith against him This woorde cause ys not referred to the euidence of significacion but to the efficacie or ells saieth he this particle of the definicion causa existit and ys the cause were superfluouse For by that particle that the definicion hath vt imaginem gerat that yt beare the image the euidence of significacion ys sufficientlie expressed To haue anie thing superfluouse in a definicion ys a great inconuenience among learned men Râ—ssâ—n li. 2 adversus OecolaÌ„p cap. 29. Wherfore nothing in this definicion being superfluouse yt must nedes stand that the sacramentes be causes effectuall and being so they excell the sacramentes of the olde lawe For wher they were but onelie signifieng owre are as the definicion teacheth both signifieng and effectuall Nam efficiunt quod significant For they bring that to effecte which they signifie Aug. in prolog psal 73 But let vs heare sainct Augustine teaching the difference of these sacramentes for he nothing dissenteth from this that ys saied but moche consirmeth yt Thus he saieth OportunÃ¨ non ex nostra sed Dei dispensatione factuÌ„ est vt modÃ² audiremus ex euangelio quia lex per Moysen data est gratia veritas per Iesum Christum facta est Si enim discernimus duo Testamenta nec eadem promissa eadem tamen pleraque praecepta Nam non occides Non moechaheris Non furaberis Honora patrem matrem Non falsum testimonium dixeris Non concupisces res proximi tui non concupisces vxorem proximi tui nobis praeceptum est et quisquis ea non obseruanerit deuiat nec omnino dignus est qui accipere mereatur montem sanctum Dei de quo dictum est Quis babitabit in tabernaculo tuo aut quis requiescet in monte sancto tuo Innocens manibus mundo corde Haec dicimus fratres charissimi vt omnes de nouo testamento discatis non inhaerere terrenis sed coelestia adipisci Discussa ergo praecepta aut omnia CoÌ„parison of the lawe and the gospell and of their sacramentes eadem inueniuntur aut vix aliqua in euangelio quae non dicta sunt Ã prophetis Praecepta eadem Sacramenta non eadem promissa non eadem Videamus quare praecepta eadem quia secundÃ¹m haec Deo seruive debemus Sacramenta non eadem quia alia sunt sacramenta dantia salutem alia promittentia saluatorem Sacramenta noui Testamenti dant salutem sacramenta veteris testamenti promiserunt saluatorem Quando ergo iam teneas promissa quid quaeris promittentia saluatorem iam habens Haec dico teneas promissa non quÃ²d iam accepimus vitam aeternam sed quia iam venit Christus qui per Prophetas praenunciabatur Mutata sunt sacramenta facta sunt faciliora pauciora salubriora In good season yt ys doen not of owre but of the dispensacion of God that nowe we shoulde heare oute of the Gospell that the lawe was geuen by Moyses but grace and veritie was doen by Iesus Chryste Yf we discern the two testamentes ther be not the same promisses but there be manie of the same coÌ„maundementes Forthowe shalt not kill Thowe shall not coÌ„mitte adulterie Thowe shalt not steale Honour thy father and thy mother Thowe shal not speake false wittnesse Thow shalt not desire thy neighbours goods And thowe shalt not desire the wief of thy neighbour yt ys to vs also coÌ„maunded And whosoeuer shall not obserue them he goeth oute of the waie neither by anie meanes ys he woorthie to take the holie hill of God of the which yt ys saied Who shall dwell in thie tabernacle or who shall rest in thy holie hill He that ys innocent of his handes and of a clean heart These thinges we saie derely beloued brethered that all yowe that be of the newe testament maie learn not to cleaue to earthly thinges but to gett heauenly thinges The coÌ„maundentes therfor discussed either they are all fownde to be the same or ells scarce anie in the Gospell whiche were not spoken of the Prophetes The coÌ„maundementes be all one The sacramentes be not all one The promesses be not all one Let vs see why the coÌ„maundementes be all Sacramentes of the newe lawe geue saluacion one bicause according to these we aught to serue God The sacramentes be not all one For they be other sacramentes geuing saluacion and other promising a Sauiour The sacramentes of the newe Testament geue saluacion The sacramentes of the olde testament haue promised a Sauiour Forasmoch then as thowe nowe holdest the promisses what

that our sacrifice ys more excellent then the sacrifice of the olde Testament yt ys manifest also that he spake yt not of his sacrifice made vpon the crosse but of the sacrifice instituted in his last supper wher and when the olde sacrifices were taken awaie and this one placed for them all which Chrysostom well taught when he saied for the slaughter of beastes be commaunded himself to be offred So that he commaunded himself to be offred when the sacrifices were chaunged But the sacrifices were chaunged in the last supper wherfore in the last supper he commaunded himself to be offred THE SEVENTENTH CHAPITER PROCEAdeth vpon the same text by the exposition of Chrysostom and sainct Hierom. ALbeit this text ys verie plainlie expownded by Chrysostom and that that by me was affirmed by the same his exposition fullie confirmed namely that S. Paule here speaketh of the presence of Chryst in the Sacrament and therwith also teacheth that yt ys the sacrifice of the Chrystians yet that the trueth maie be the better esteemed as yt ys plentifull in yt selfe so shall yt be setfurth by plentie of wittnesses And wher Chrysostom expownding the first parte of the text hath confessed the catholique faith of the presence of the blood of Chryst in the cuppe with these plain woordes that yt ys that which flowed oute of the side which ys so spoken as the Aduersarie can not once open his mouth to speake against yt And in confessing the bloode ther ys no doubte but he al so do the like of the bodie Yet forasmoch as he proceadeth and expowndeth the other parte of the text which speaketh of the partaking of the bodie I shall not for the commoditie of the reader and the setting furth of Godes trueth spare my laboure to shewe furth the same The rest of the text ys Et panis quem frangimus nonne communicatio corporis Christiest And the breade whiche we breake ys yt not a communicacion of the 1. Corin. 10 of the bodie of Chryst Although the vulgar english bibles doth otherwise inglish this text saing that the breade that ys broken ys a partaking of the bodie Yet I being aduertised by Chrysostom that communicacion includeth more than participacion I english yt as I maie with this woorde communicacion according to his instructioÌ„ which ye shal perceaue in his saing Thus he saieth Quare non dixit participatio quia amplius quiddam significare voluit Chrysost in 10. 1. Cor. multam inter has conuenientiam ostendere Non enim participatione tantÃ¹m acceptione sed vnitate communicamus Quemadmodum enim corpus illud vnitum est Comunicacion ys a nearer coniuÌ„ction theÌ„ participacion therfor the translacion of the english bible ys to be misliked Christo ita nos per hunc panem vnione coniungimur Sed quare addit quem frangimus Hoc in Encharistia videre licet in cruce autem minimÃ¨ sed omnino contrÃ Os enim eius inquit non conteretur Sed quod in cruce passus non est id in oblatione patitur propter te srangi permittie Ys not the bread whiche we breake a communicacion of the bodie of Chryst Why did he not saie a particpacion or partaking Bicause he wolde signifie some more thing and shewe a great agreement betwixt these thinges We doe not communicate by partaking and receauing onelie but also by vnitie For as that bodie was vnited to Chryst Euen so we by this breade are ioined together in an vnion But wherfore dothe he adde which we breake This maie yowe see in the Sacrament in the crosse not so but alltogether contrarie For saieth he his bone shall not be broken But that he suffred not in the crosse that he suffreth in the sacrifice and permitteth for thee to be broken Thus he In this liuely exposition of Chrysostom whiche so I call bicause he leaueth no woorde vnquickned and made as yt were aliue to mans vnderstanding he geueth vs three worthie instructioÌ„s And first he geueth a cause why Three not able instructions out of Chrysost S. Paule calleth this a communicacion raither then a participacion bicause saieth he by the receipt of this mysterie we are ioined together in one with Chryst as his bodie was ioined vnto him Whiche vnion neither participacion nor receauing do expresse or signifie For we maie partake or receaue a thing and yet not be made one with yt But duely communicating the bodie of Chryst we are made one with yt For communication ys either CommunicacioÌ„ what yt ys a making of one thing common to manie or to make manie to be one thing and all one with yt and yt one with them Of this more in the exposition of the next scripture The seconde note ys that where he saieth that as that bodie was vnited to Chryst So by this bread we are ioined together in an vnion Where he instructeth vs again of the presence of Chryst in the SacrameÌ„t before by his blood here by his bodie and yet in eche parte full Chryst That this maie appeare plain vnto the reader as yt ys true in yt self vnderstande this that the bodie of Chryst ys vnited to him reallie verilie and substanciallie and not spituallie Yf then ther be an vnion of Chryst and vs as of him and his bodie then yt must be an vnion reall but this maner of vnion can not be but by a reall communicacion wherfore we do reallie communicate with the bodie of Chryst This ys confirmed to vs by the saing of ChrysostoÌ„ when he saieth that we be ioined together in vnion by this bread A bare peice of bread can no more make vs one substanciallie with Chryst than a peice of beof or anie other victuall Wherfore this bread that he speaketh of ys the bread and the foode of his verie bodie which duely receaued maketh vs to be in Chryst and Chryst as S. Hylary saieth naturallie and as S. Cyrill saieth substanciallie in vs. The thirde note also both confirmeth this that here ys saied of the presence Real presence and sacrifice both auouched and also that ys before saied of the sacrifice For here by expresse woordes he dothe so tearme yt For he saieth thus that that he suffred not in the crosse that he suffreth in the sacrifice and permitteth to be broken for thee In the which woordes he declareth two distinct beinges of Chryst one vpon the crosse the other in sacrifice For he maketh no difference either of Chryst or of his substance or of his being But euen the same that suffred not to be broken vpon the crosse euen the same suffreth in the sacrifice and permitteth to be broken for thee Yf the verie same be in this sacrifice that was vpon the crosse then we must nedes confesse him to be as verilie present in the sacrament as vpon the crosse And the same so present for that he ys our onely and euerlasting sacrifice to be our sacrifice Yf we aske where

be made one bodie and one bread And nowe reader that thowe hauest hearde Chrysostome so plainlie expownding sainct Paule we will leaue him and heare sainct Augustine for he also geueth an vnderstanding of this text on this wise Quia Christus passus est pro nobis coÌ„mendauit nobis in isto sacramento corpus sanguinem suum Quod etiam fecit nos ipsos Nam nos ipsius corpus facti sumus per misericordiam ipsius quod accipimus nos sumus Bicause Chryst hath suffred for vs he commended vnto vs in this Sacrament his bodie and bloode whiche also he hath made our selues For we also are made his bodie and August feria 2. Pasch Chryst hath coÌ„meÌ„ded to vs his bodie and blood in the Sacr. by his mercie that we receaue we be In this short saing he hath declared both the mean by the which we are made the bodie of Chryst and that we be the bodie of Chryst First he openeth the mean saing that bicause Chryst hath suffred for vs he hath commended vnto vs in this Sacrament his bodie and bloode Note the speache of sainct Augustin he saieth not that Chryst hath commended vnto vs bicause he hath suffred for vs a figure for a memoriall of that his passion but he saieth by plain woordes that Chryst commended to vs his bodie and bloode And applieng the cause to the effecte afterwarde he saieth By his mercie we be that we receaue Which in plain speache ys that bicause we receaue the bodie of Chryste therfore by his mercie we be the bodie of Chryst And to moue vs to abide in this bodie of Chryst he proceadeth Dic mihi quid est ex quo viuit Spiritus tuus viuit de corpore tuo an corpus ex spiritu tuo Respondet omnis qui viuit Ex spiritu viuo Qui autem hoc non potest respondere nescio an viuat Quid respondet omnis qui viuit Corpus vtique meum viuit de spiritu meo Vis ergo viuere et de spiritu Christi In corpore esto Christi Nunquid enim corpus meum viuit de spiritu tuo Meum viuit de spiritu meo et tuum de spiritu tuo Non potest viuere corpus Christinisi de spiritu Christi Inde est quod exponens Apostolus Paulus hunc panem vnus panis inquit vnum corpus sumus Tell me what ys that of the which thow liuest dothe thie spiritt liue by thie bodie or thie bodie by the spiritt Euerie one that liueth answereth I liue by my spiritte He that can not this answere I can not tell whether he liueth what doth euerie one answere that liueth My bodie liueth by my spirit Wilt thow also liue by the Spiritt of Chryst Be in the bodie of Chryst For doth my bodie liue by thie spiritte My bodie liueth of my spiritt aÌ„d thy bodie of thie spiritt The bodie of Chryst can not liue but by the Spiritte of Chryst Therfore yt ys that the Apostle Paule expownding vnto vs this bread saieth we being manie are one bread and one bodie Thus sainct Augustine In whom as we haue goodlie instruction for our faith so we haue the like for our conuersacion But not to be tediouse to the reader S. Augustin shall be left withoute note here vnto him to his farder coÌ„sideracion of this his saing for that by yt that ys saied yt ys easie to perceaue the wholl minde of him in this matter THE FIVE AND TWENTETH CHAPITER proceadeth vpon the same text by Damascen and Haymo AS the Aduersarie vseth all the craft subtletie and falshead that he can to deceaue the simple and to abduce him to lead him awaie and to carie him a farre from the flocke and folde of Chryste to the entent he shall not desire to come home again and yf he do yet for the distance he shall not finde the waie to come as a shepe if he be caried but a litle waie from the flocke that he went in he will make great shift to return to yt again if he be caried farre of he neither desiereth neither for his simplicitie can find the waie to return therfore the Aduersarie I saie coÌ„tenteth not himself to bring the simple a litle oute of the waie from the faith into one onelie erroure or heresie but he will carie and The Aduersarie leadeth the simple into manie errours that holden by them he shall not find the waie home again lead him a great waie out of the right waie by manie steppes and manie passes that ys into manie errours and heresies For seldome hath yt ben seen that the Deuell bringeth a man into one onelie heresie but into Diuerse wherwith that common enemie oftentimes will so delight him that he shall haue no desire to return home again or ells through plain simplicitie not perceauing the falshead of heresie or by malice blinded he shall be as yt were plainlie ignorant not able to finde the waie to return but so shall remain in a straung place and then which ys the woorst of all he shall thinke himself at home when he ys fardest of Therfore I saie seing the Aduersarie hath so moch falshead to bring men to soch great blindnesse in to so great calamitie and miserie of their soules yt ys our parte to seke all the helpe of trueth to reduce them that be straied and to staie them that be at home that they perish not in that lamentable daunger neither suffre them to come to yt Wherfore although this trueth of our naturall and corporall communion with Chryst be allreadie sufficiently proued and testified yet that the reader shall perceaue that yt ys not a doubtfull matter and testified of a few but a certen matter of assured trueth and generallie receaued and testified of manie we shal go forwarde in producing of mo and of these Damascen shall be the first who saieth thus Quia ex vno pane participamus omnes vnum corpus Christi vnus sanguis inuicem DamasceÌ„ li. 4. ca. 14. membra efficimur concorporati Christo existentes Omni igitur virtute obseruemus ne participemus participatione haereticorum neque tribuamus Nolite enim sancta dare canibus inquit Dominus noster neque seminare margaritas vestras ante porcos vt non participes erroris malae fidei eorum efficiamur atque condemnationis Si enim omnino vnio est ad Christum ad inuicem omnino omnibus comparticipantibus nobis secundÃ¹m electionem vnimur Nam ex electione vnio ipsa fit non sine nostra sententia ac deliberatione Omnes enim vnum corpus sumus quoniam ex vno pane participamus c. Bcause we do all partake of one bread we are made one bodie of Chryst and one blood and membres one of an other being coÌ„corporated vnto Chryst Let vs therfore obserue with all our powre that we partake not with the partaking of heretikes neither that we geue vnto theÌ„ For our

two significacions of the Sonne and of the holie Gost and to the washing of the Soule from sinne by grace geuen in the ministracion of the same Sacrament yet the wholl ministracion and praiers aswell before batisme as after vsed in the same by a generall significacion ys called Baptisme So ys the consecracion and oblacion of the bodie of Chryst with all praiers and Ceremonies either going before or folowing the same by generall significacion called Masse This breif description of the Masse being made let vs examin the partes of yt whiche of them or howe manie of theÌ„ be against the woorde of God and the example or practise of the primatiue Church as yt ys pretended that yt maie be perceaued what iust cause the Proclamer hath so moche to exclame against the Masse The first parte ys consecracion This parte for that by yt ys taught the Parts of the Masse presence of Chrystes bodie and bloode whiche the Proclamer can not abide ys one cause why he reiecteth the Masse But howe iustly he doth it yt maie be perceaued through oute all this booke in which ys prooued the presence whiche the catholique Church teacheth and the figure ys improued whiche the Aduersary mainteineth An other parte ys oblacion or sacrifice wherin the Churche offreth Chryst to God the Father according to the commaundement of the same owne maister Chryst in the memoriall of his passion and deathe That this parte ys not against the scriptures and the holy Fathers yt ys allready proued in the declaracion of the prophecies of Melchisedech Daniel and Malachie in the first booke wherunto ys made an addicion whiche thowe shalt finde in the xxxvij chapiter of that same booke sufficient I trust to aunswere and satisfie anie reasonable man An other parte ys receauing of the Sacrament In the whiche twoo thinges do offend the Proclamer The one ys that the people do receaue vnder one kinde The other that the preist receaueth alone Whether the receauing vnder one kinde be against the Scriptures or the practise of the Primitiue Churche yt ys disputed and the trueth declared in the seconde booke from the lxiiij chap. to the. end of lxvijchap As for the receauing whiche the Proclamer termeth priuate yt shall be hereafter treacted of In doctrine which ys an other parte I knowe not what fault he can finde In praier the first and last parte of the Masse he findeth two faultes The one that praier ys made to sainctes The other that praier ys made for the dead for these two we shal haue recourse to the primitiue Churche and there make triall whether the Church doth well in so doing or the Aduersarie euell in denieng the same to be laufull and good Nowe for the first parte of the Masse whiche ys consecracion I will not moche otherwise here treact of yt but onelie laing furth the practise of the Apostolique and primitiue Churche therin compare the doinges of the catholique Churche nowe therwith that yt maie be perceaued howe iustlie yt foloweth the example therof As for the effect of consecracion whiche ys the presence of Chrystes bodie ther neadeth here no speciall treactice for that the woll booke treateth therof so fullie that yf the Proclamer will finde fault in the Masse forthat the presence ys taught ther to be he maie in other places of this worke finde sufficieÌ„t matter for the proofe of the presence whiche yf yt will not satisfie him neither maie a fewe woordes here spoken moche helpe him As for the seconde parte whiche ys the oblacion or sacrifice of Chrystes bodie as before yt ys declared that yt ys offred according to the will and commaundement or Chryst himself and that by the testimonie of the Scripturs as they be vnderstaÌ„ded of a nombre of the most auncient Fathers and by diuerse other graue authorities So shall yt be nowe set furth and coÌ„mended to yowe by the practise of the Primitiue Churche Whiche we haue differred to this place And forasmoche as the Proclamer to extenuate and abase the honorable estimacion of the Masse whiche yt ought to haue in the heartes of the people doth for shame and with shame conceale the names of soche auncient Authours as do testifie that both Sainct Peter and Sainct Iames saied Masse the one at Rome the other at Hierusalem and doth also to WheÌ„ truth and learning serueth not mocking and skorning be their best argumeÌ„tes bring the matter in contempt aske by waie of skorn whie raither we saie not that Chryste him self saied Masse for that were the neerer waie to bring the Masse in creditte I shall by good and sufficient authoritie shewe that not onelie Sainct Peter and Sainct Iames but also Chryste him self did saie Masse And so beginning at Chryst descende to three or foure hundreth yeares after Chryst and shewe the practise of the Churche And for this time I will ouerpasse the farder mocke and skorn that he maketh against the blessed Masse asking whie we doe not raither saie that Aaron and his chapleins saied Masse For in dede saieth he as yt hath ben vsed the Churche hath had moch more of the Robes of the Ceremonies and of the sacrifices of Aaron then of the institucion or ordeinance of Chryste For ys I shoulde touche him for that I shoulde cause Arons garment worne for a Bishopporke and the CoÌ„munion ministred in a cope him to be perceaued to impugne and in that behalf to skorne the ministracion of the Communion For that ys ministred in coapes and other soche garmentes as before were vsed in the Churche and he himself refuseth not to weare Aarons garment for a Bishoppericke So well agreeth his doing and his preaching together And thus scoffing at the garmentes that be nowe yet vsed he seemeth to me not to like this order of Religion that he liueth in but raither to reprooue this as he doth the other For in this poinct by his iudgement they holde both of Aaron But letting this passe I will returne to my matter and wish the Reader to remembre what this woorde Masse doth signifie as yt ys declared in the last chapiter and therwith to haue in minde as yt ys saied in this chapiter Chryste saied Masse that Masse ys the action of the consecracion oblacion and receauing of the bodie and bloode of Chryst and so vnderstanding Masse I saie that Chryst did saie Masse For he in his last Supper did institute Masse and did ther consecrate his bodie and bloode and offred them in sacrifice and gaue them to his Apostes to be receaued and commaunded that so yt shoulde be doen in the remembrance of his passion and death In this matter who listeth to be satisfied forsomoche as one auncient Authour maie satisfie a man let him reade the Epistle of Sainct Ciprian to Cecilius Epist li. 2. Epist. 3. and he shall ther sinde euery parte of the Masse here reckned to be doen by Chryst First for the consecracion he saieth thus Vt in Genesi

neclect that in all thinges bothe in faith and doinges we maie among our selues consent and agree These be the verie woordes of Leo. Thys ys the place which the Proclamer taketh in hande to reporte Iudge now I saie gentle Reader whether he hath truelie reported him or no. And first wher he alleadged Leo to prooue his communion vieue well I praie thee the authour and obserue diligentlie yf ther be in him anie one woorde of communion or communicantes and See here the impudencie of the Proclamer thowe shalt perceaue that ther ys no mencion made therof What trueth then ys to be thought either in the man or in the cause that he defendeth when to maintein yt he ys fain to falsifie the authours that he alleageth Ys yt not lamentable to see his shamelesse boldenesse that he wolde wittinglievtter in an honorable audieÌ„ce and also publish the same in printe to an wholl realme that he knewe to be false and clean otherwise then was the intent or minde of the authour which he alleaged That yt was not the minde of the authour thowe shalt easilie perceaue For first wher the Proclamer vseth these woordes communicate and communion The authour hath these See here his false sleight woordes the oblacion of the sacrifice and the sacrifice Nowe bicause the Proclamer hateth this woorde sacrifice as a scorpion as being applied to the holie SacrameÌ„t of Chrystes bodie and blood therfore to ease his maliciouse affection and to delude his hearers and readers yt liked his Chrystian sinceritie properlie tearmed hereticall malignitie to corrupt and falsifie the authour and reporte soche matter to be in him as ther ys in dede no woorde toward yt in him I mene to that sense and vnderstanding Again thowe seist that in all that sermon yf yt be woorthie of that name his cheifest pourpose ys to inueigh against that holie mynistracion whiche ys called the Masse in so moch that he saieth that this name Masse was not in vse manie years after Chryst which ys before improoued yet in this authour Leo euen in this place whiche he alleaged ther ys expresse and liuelie mencion made of the Masse and he calleth yt Masse that thys man calleth Communion And these twoo woordes sacrifice and Masse Sacrifice and Masse cause the Proclamer to falsisie Leo. vsed of this authour caused as I haue saied thys man to falsifie the authour so that he durst not alleadge him as he wrote but as yt might serue to helpe hys wicked cause To ende this note of the falsifieng of this authour by this Proclamer this also ys to be obserued and marked howe God suffreth Sathan and his Disciples to be blinded that they shall bring furth and alleadge places whiche being well weighed and taken as they lie according to the minde of the authour shall not onely ouerthrowe their matter as this authour in testifieng both sacrifice and Masse but shall also geue and mynistre occasion that theyr falshead their corruption of authours their blinding of the people shall be perceaued as nowe allreadie yt hath ben perceaued in sainct Hierom and this authour and shall more hereafter in thys matter But the Proclamer proceadeth and prooueth by the Masse booke that ther shoulde be a Communion bicause the preist saieth oremâ—is Let vs praie I see this man wolde plaie smal game raither then he will set out he wolde content himself with some ssender shewe or countenaunce of proofe raither then mainteining an euell matter to seem to be destitute of all proofe I praier thee good reader weigh with me what proof ys yt of the communion of the Sacrament that the preist saieth oremus Let vs praie what dependance ys ther of that woorde to proue the communion of the Sacrament Yf he can by that woorde prooue the communion of the Sacrament Let vs praie ys saied in the morning and euenning praier wheÌ„ther ys no CommunioÌ„ he maie doe the like in the Sacrament of Baptisme and in other sacramentes also for ther the preist saieth Oremus Let vs praie Yf by yt he had trauailed to proue a communion in praier he had doen right but to abuse yt to prooue the necessitie of the Communion of the Sacrament in soch sorte as he meneth yt ys raither a declaracion of his malice against the churche then anie proofe of his pourpose That ther ys a Communion in praier the other woordes of the preist whiche he also alleageth for hys pourpose doe manifestlie declare The preist saieth he saieth The Lorde be with yowe and the people aunswer And with thie spirit Doe ye not see here howe the preist and CommunioÌ„ in praier at Masse the people ioin themselues together one praing for the other Whiche maner of Communion ys also liuelie settfurth by that that he afterwarde produceth oute of the order of the Masse The preist saieth he turneth him to the people and saieth Orate pro me fratres sorores Praie for me brothers and sisters Here as before ye haue perceaued and shall hereafter perceaue he vseth a sleight he durst not for shame tell yowe why the preist desiereth the people to praie for him but as traitours clippe the kinges coin and deceaue the people so he clippeth manie of the places whiche he alleageth to deceaue gods people But that his falshead maie be perceaued and the cause knowen why the preist desiereth the people An other sleight of the Prolamer to praie for him I shall laie before yowr eies the wholl praier Thus he praieth Orate fratres sorores pro me vt meum pariter vestrum acceptum sit omnipotenti Deo sacrificium Whiche ys thus moche to saie in english Praie for me brothers and sisters that my sacrifice and yowr maie be accepted of our Lord God Two Communions in the Masse besides the rauing of the Sacra Se ye now his sleight Ys here anie praier for the communion whiche he intendeth Doe these woordes proue that the preist can not receaue alone Ys ther anie mencion made here of that his communion Doe ye not perceaue that with two or three woordes he wolde blere yowe eyes and as the inglish prouerbe ys make yowe beleue that the Moone ys made of a green cheese The desire of the preist ys not that all they that be present wolde receaue the Communion but that they wil praie that their common sacrifice maie be acceptable to God This with the bringing in of two or three woordes wolde this man craftelie haue concealed and suppressed being as I suppose ashamed and grudged in conscience to let yowe know the verie thing required to be praied for which ys the acceptacion of the sacrifice which sacrifice he and his complices doe wickedlie denie Thus ye see that he wolde claime helpe of the Masse booke which in dede doeth him no other helpe but open his shame Yt doeth vs thus moch helpe that hereby we learn two Communions The first ys of praier the second of

church of Rome continueth the same In this alleaged place be mo vntrueths then one vsed by the Proclamer First he doeth father yt vpon Calixtus wher in dede yt ys the decree of Anacletus But this ys not so great a matter I wolde easelie pardon that fault yf ther were no woorse in him But he coÌ„mitteth two great faultes here besides that For he doeth both distort abuse and wrest the place and also as he hath doen diuerse other he doeth mutilate yt and cutte yt of by the knees as we saie and bringeth yt not whollie as yt lieth I will therfor bring the whol place that yowe maie both perceaue how moch he hath of a deuelish pourpose left oute and also plainlie see howe vntruelie he wresteth yt to a false sense This ys the place as yt ys alleaged oute of Anacletus by Bartholemew CaraÌ„za in the summe of the CouÌ„cels Sacerdotes quando Domino sacrificant non soli hoc agere debent sed testes secum adhibeant vt Domino in sacratis Deo locis perfectÃ¨ sacrificare probentur iuxta illud Deuteron 12. Vide ne offeras holocausta in omni loco quem videris sed in loco quem elegit Dominus Dens tuus Episcopus Deo sacrificans testes secum habeat et plures quÃ m alius sacerdos cum quo peracta consecratione omnes ministri communicent qui noluerint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus Sic Apostoli statuerunt et sancta Romana tenet ecclesia The preistes when they doe offre sacrifice vnto our Lord they shall not doe yt alone but they shall haue wittnesses with theÌ„ that they maie be proued to doe sacrifice to our Lorde perfectlie in places dedicated vnto God according to the saing of Deuteron the xii chapter Take beed thowe offre not sacrifice in euery place that thow seest but in the place that thy Lord God hath chooseÌ„ A Bishoppe doing sacrifice to God let him haue mo wittenesses with him then an other preist with whome when the coÌ„secracion ys doen let all the mynisters communicate they that will not shall be forbidden to enter into the church This same place of Anacletus ys also alleadged in the second distinction hauing the same sense in lenght that this hath in Summe or in breif Nowe first iudge of the sinceritie of the Proclamer in alleaging the Fathers whether he doeth as yt becometh one that taketh vpon him to correct all the worlde and to preache the trueth which in his iudgement was before lacking Ys this sinceritie to bringe three or foure woordes of the ende of a saing which maie be wrested to his pourpose and to leaue oute all that goeth before Secondlie for the vnderstanding of the place he hath voonderfully abused his audience before whom he preached yt and all soche also as haue or shall happen to read the same sermon nowe imprinted and diuulged For in the epistle of Anacletus yt ys decreed thus Episcopus Deo sacrificans testes secum habeat in solemnioribus diebus aut septeÌ„ aut quinque aut tres Diaconos qui eius oculi dicuÌ„tur subdia conos atque reliquos ministros secuÌ„habeat The Bishoppe doing sacrifice vnto God let Anacletus cpla 1. him in the solemne daies haue either seuen or siue or three deaeons whiche be called his eies and subdeacons and other mynistres And then yt foloweth that the Proclamer alleageth Peracta consecratioue omnes communicent when the consecracion ys doen let all communicate So that thys decree can not be vnderstaÌ„ded of all the people but onelie of all those Deacons and Subdeacons and ministres which shoulde attende vpon the Bishoppe in the time that he offreth sacrifice to God which ys as moche to saie as when he saied Masse The decree saieth not when the consecracion ys doen let all the people communicate but let all that ys all they assistent to the Bishoppe in the ministracion the Deacons the Subdeacons and the ministres let them communicate and if they will not let them be prohibited to entre the churche That this shoulde be vnderstanded as ys saied yt doeth well appeare by the relacion of this decree to the doctrine of the Apostles So saieth the decree Canon 9. Apostol haue the Apostles taught In dede in their canons they haue so taught For this ys one of their Canons Si quis Episcopus aut Presbiter aut Diaconus vel quilibet ex sacerdotali catalogo facta oblatione non communicauerit aut causam dicat vt si rationabilis fuerit veniam consequatur aut si non dixerit communione priuetur Yf anie Bishoppe or preist or deacon or anie other of the clergie when the consecracion ys doen doe not communicate either let him shewe a cause that if yt be reasonable he maie be pardoned or if he shewe none let him be excoÌ„municated Thus the Apostles Canon The cause why this Canon was so made was not for the necessitie of the thing that the sacrifice were not perfect or the Masse not good in yt self if the cleargie assistent did not communicate but that they absteining might be occasion of offence to the people of suspicion against him that did offre the sacrifice that he had not wel doeÌ„ yt as the words immediatelie folowing in the same Canon doe plainlie declare Sinon dixeritcoÌ„munione priuetur tanquaÌ„ qui populo causa laesionis extiterit dans suspicionem de eo qui sacrificauit quod rectÃ¨ non obtulerit Yf he shewe no reasonable cause why he absteineth let him be excommunicated as one that ys cause of offence to the people geuing suspicion of him that did sacrifice that he had not well offred yt Thus nowe ye see howe this man hath abused this decree of Anacletus vnderstanding yt of all that be present where yt ys to be vnderstanded onelie of them that attend vpon the Bishoppe in the time of the holie ministracion and that also on solemne daies In this poinct onelie he hath not abused this decree but in this also that by yt he intended to prooue the Masse an euell thing aÌ„d to be naught if ther were no communicates besides the preist and that masse ought not to be saied withoute communicantes and finallie that the Church ys wicked so abusing yt where in dede ther ys no one sillabe in that decree to prooue these or anie one of them or anie parte of one of them For as in the answer to the tenth Canon of the Apostles by them alleaged yt was saied so yt maie be saied here that be yt yt were vnderstanded that all the people shoude communicate as he wolde haue yt but vntruelie yet in this decree he findeth no prohibition that the preist shall not offre sacrifice nor receaue him self if the people will not hefindeth not either here or ells wher that the masse ys naught if ther be nomo communicantes in that place but the preist Wherfor we maie conclude that all that he hath in this poincte alleaged hath but a

The bodie and bloode of Chryste consecrated to two ends and blood ys cheiflie and principallie doen for two endes The one that yt should by an vnblooddie maner in the name of the wholl Church be offred vnto God our heauenly Father in sacrifice representatiue aÌ„d coÌ„memoratiue of that his blody sacrifice offred vpoÌ„ the crosse The other thatyt should be receaued when yt ys offred Yf yt haue these two endes as alwaies yt hath for after yt ys coÌ„secrated yt ys allwaies receaued TheÌ„ hauing the endes that yt was ordeined for yt can not be saied absolutelie to be doen in vain In some respect yet yt maie be saied to be doen in vain as in the godlie entent of Chrysostom who of godlie zeale to prouoke his people to receaue the blessed Sacrament did by himself and his preistes dailie offre the solemne sacrifice which forasmoch as he did yt to the pourpose that they should coÌ„municate and yet did not he might verie well saie that his pourpose was frustrated and that sithen they came not hys doing in that respect was vain And that this was hys mening his woordes doe well declare For when he had saied that the dailie sacrifice was doen in vain and that he stoode at the aultar in vain he addeth the cause For saieth he ther ys none that will partake with vs. As who might saie In this respect that we looke that the people shoulde communicate and yet none will come we stand in vain at the aultar That he ment not that the holie oblacion was absolutelie vain yf the people did not communicate yt ys more plain then that yt neadeth anie probacion For first yf yt were so wolde so great a learned man so holie a maÌ„ either haue offred the sacrifice himself or cause yt to be offred dailie wheÌ„ he knewe yt to be doen in vain Secondlie howe can he saie that holie mynistracion to be doen in vain wher himself confesseth in the consecracion so li. 3. de sacerd great a miracle to be doen so great beneuolence of God to be shewed to mankinde that in the same time of consecracion Chryst that sitteth aboue with the Father ys nowe in the handes of men Again doeth he mean yt to be doen in vain that saieth that the mynistracion ys so high so excellent and Jbid. li 7. so honourable that Angels in that time doe accompanie the preist and that the heauenlie powers be assembled together in the honoure of him that ys ther offred Farder doeth he thinke this sacrifice to be doen in vain that saieth we offre Hom. 17. ad Hebr. the same sacrifice that Chryst offred Moreouer ys yt like that he taketh yt to be doen in vain wher praier ys made for princes for rulers and for all that doe acknowledge Christ wher also praier ys made for peace for health for wealth for prosperitie and for the helpe and releif of all that be sicke in Idem in Liturgia Sermon in Enceniis Serm. 3. ad Philip. pain in captiuitie and in pryson wher all the heauenly powers doe praie for vs with the preist Finallie yt can not be saied that he thinketh yt to be in vain that saieth that the Apostles did know that moche releif and moche profitte cometh to the soules departed by the oblacion of this holie sacrifice Wherfor I conclude that he spake yt to be vain not absolutelie but in respect of his pourpose and desire which was frustrated bicause the people did not communicate That the Sacrament maie be receaued alone without a noÌ„bre of communicantes Euseb li. 6. ca. 34. the historie ecclesiasticall also proueth inuinciblie For ther we read that one Serapion being sicke sent his seruant to the preist desiering that he wolde mynistre the Sacrament to him that he might depart The preist being sicke and not able to go himself and yet loath but that the man shoulde Serapion being sick receaued the SacrameÌ„t alone receaue the Sacrament or that he died in this necessitie sent of the Sacrament by the messenger which when yt was brought the sicke man receaued yt withoute anie to communicate with him which maie well be saied both for that the historie maketh no mencion of anie communicantes and also that as the historie testifieth the quantitie of the SacrameÌ„t that was sent was verie litle not able to suffice anie nombre By this then yt maie be perceaued that in the auncient Church yt was not reputed or taken as an heynouse crime to receaue the Sacrament alone as now the Proclamer wold make yt but yt was thought good and commendable when occasion serued A moch like testimonie for this matter haue we of S. Augustine wherof mencion ys made before which ys that a certein man hauing hys house infested with euell spirittes came to sainct Augustin house S. Augustin being absent and desiered of hys preistes that they wolde ease him of that molestacion One of them went and saied Masse ther and praied earnestlie and the euell spirittes ceassed anie more to trooble the house Here we perceaue the Sacrifice to be offred Masse to be saied but we heare no woorde of a communioÌ„ As by this that ys hitherto saied yt maie be perceaued that the preist mynistring or anie other person maie receaue the blessed Sacrament with oute anie other communicantes according to the practise of the primitiue and auncient Church so shall yt now be declared by auncient lawes and decrees that the people were by lawe bownd but to heare Masse and not allwaies to receaue Soter that was the eleuenth Bishoppe of Rome after S. Peter and liued aboute the yeare of our Lorde lxiii made this decree Nullus presbyterorum Missarum solemnia celebrare praesumat nisi duobus praesentibus sibiî€‚ue respondentibus ipse Soter vndecimus RoÌ„ Epis Epist secund ad Episcop Jtaliae tertius habeatur quia cÃ¹m pluraliter ab eo dicitur Dominus vobiscum illud in secretis Orate pro me apertissimÃ¨ conuenit vt ip sius respondeatur salutationi Let none of the preistes presume to celebrate the solemne office of the Masse except ther be two present and answering him so that he maie be the thirde for when yt ys plurallie saied of him Owre Lorde be with yowe and in the secretes Praie for me yt ys most manifestlie conuenient that his salutacion be answered Here ye see yt commaunded that some be present at the Masse but not alwaies to communicate but answere the salutacion of the preist In a Councell also thus we finde yt decreed Missas die Dominico secularibus totas audire speciali ordine praecipimus ita vt ante benedictionem sacerdotis egredi populus Concil Agathen habetur de consecr Dist 1. non praesumat quodsi fecerint ab Episcopo publicÃ¨ confundantur We commaunde the secular people by speciall order vpon the sondaie to heare the wholl Masse So that the people presume not to go furth before the benediction of the

communicateth vnder one kinde nor alone thinking that of necessitie yt must so be and coÌ„temneth the auncient practise of the primitiue Church and most fiercelie accuseth the wholl Churche for these thousand years of the transgression of Chrystes institucion and commaundement Thus ye maie see that the Masse of the catholique Church for the substanciall parts and poinctes of yt being conferred to the Masse of the Apostles and Fathers of the primitiue and auncient Church ys fownd to be fullie agreable and the Communion of the Schismaticall Church in all poincts disagreable Yf the Masse had disagreed or dissented in anie substanciall poinct thow maist be well assured gentle Reader that the Proclamer wolde not by so slender so impertinent yea and so vntrue conferences haue gone aboute to improue and disgrace yt as he doeth He conferred yt with the Masse of S. Iames but in soch sorte that yf he had neuer made pithier oracion in the disputacion at the Paruis in Oxforde I ween he shoulde neuer haue ben alowed for a generall Sophister But God be praised that his catholique Churche ys so appoincted that the enemies can not finde anie weightie matter iustlie to repugn or reproue yt But let vs see his conferences S. Iames saeth he saied Masse in the common toung as the people might vnderstand him They saie their Masse in a straunge toung that the people should not knowe what they mene This ys the first peice of his conference The man lackt good stuff to beginne his worke when he ys fain in the first shewe of all to place soch pelf Confider I praie thee gentle reader that yf yt shoulde be in question whether Plato were a man and his enemie shoulde come in and saie he was no man bicause he spake latin yt were but a fond argument and all together impertinent For the matter to be tried ys aboute the substance of Plato and not aboute anie accident and the enemie growndeth vpon the accident and leaueth the substance So the question here ys whether the Masse be good or no which ys about the substance of the thing and he cometh in with an argument of an accident that yt ys saied in latin and therfore yt ys not good what ys this to the pourpose Manie a thing ys good in yt self though yt be not of all vnderstanded The seuen liberal ScieÌ„ces be good though they be not vnderstanded of all men The holie scriptures be good in themselues though all men vnderstaÌ„d them not Yea euen nowe when they be in the vulgar toung they will not speake so familiarlie no not to the mynisters that euerie mynister maie vnderstand them and yet they be good So ys the Masse likewise good though all the people vnderstand yt not This argument therfore proueth nothing against the Masse Yf he wolde rightlie haue proceaded he shoulde haue proued no Masse to be or that that ys called Masse to be in substance not good before he shoulde improue yt for being saied in an vnknowen toung as he tearmeth yt for yt ys meet yt be disputed whether the thing be before yt be disputed whether yt be of this maner of that Against his first comparison therfore we maie conclude that as S. Iames Masse saied in the hebrue toung was in yt self godlie and good though the greke or latin being at the same vnderstand not what was saied so the Masse nowe saied in the catholique Churche in the latin toung though the english or frenche man vnderstand yt not yet yt ys godlie and good in yt self His second comparison ys S. Iames spake oute the woordes of consecracion They in their Masse suppresse the same woordes and kepe them close Hetherto the Proclamer plaieth small game He had leuer in a weightie matter speake some trifling woord then saie nothing Malice will cast dust or what soeuer cometh to hand at his enemie in want of better weapon Here semeth a bare Armarie wher so weake a weapon ys bent against that whiche with all force he wolde ouerthrowe He hath small fauts to obiect against the blessed Masse when lowd speaking or softe speaking ys made a faute As before ys saied what ys this to the substance of the Masse As the Masse saied ys as good as the Masse songe so ys the Masse softelie spokeÌ„ in substaÌ„ce as good as the Masfe lowdlie The primitiue church praied manie praiers of the Masse secretlie spoken Ys not yowr owne Communion as good saied as songe yf ther were anie goodnesse in yt or ys yt not as good saied in a great congregacion wher some stand so farre of as they can not heare the woordes of consecracion whiche in that case are spoken as in soste silence to them as yt ys being song in a small congregacion where all the people maie heare Were all the Masses in the auncient Church throughlie oute spokeÌ„ alowde Let the Proclamer looke the bookes and he shall finde yt otherwise Did S. Basill in his Masse pronounce the wholl action of coÌ„secracion with a lowde voice No when he began the Canon to entre toward consecracion he praied secretlie and the rule ys prefixed at the beginning of the praier Pontifex secretÃ¨ The Bishoppe praieth this secretlie By imitacion wherof I thinke yt receaued throughout the catholique Churche to praie the praiers of the Canon secretlie And when S. Basill came to the consecracion did he speake the wholl processe with a lowde voice No part he spake with a lowde voice part with a secret or sost voice but this moch the Proclamer did not knowe percase wheÌ„ he obiected this secrette speaking for a sault Yf he did he obiected yt more of malice then of trueth or wisdom Howe shender then thys comparison ys and of what weake force yt ys yt maie easilie be perceaued The thirde comparison ys this S. Iames in his Masse mynistred the Communion to the people They in their Masse receaue themselues alone This comparison in some vnderstanding ys true in some yt smelleth of vntrueth Yf yt be vnderstanded particularlie and not generally that ys that S. Iames somtimes when he saied Masse mynistred the Communion to the people yt ys true And so yt ys true that the catholique Church somtime mynistreth the Sacrament to to the people when Masse ys saied Yf yt be vnderstanded generallie that sainct lames at all times when he saied Masse mynistred the Communion to the people yt smelleth I saie of an vntrueth and so shall stand and be reputed vntill the Proclamer proue yt For I see so litle trueth in in him that withoute some better authoritie then his owne bare woorde I can not beleue him in this matter And that I thus doo I haue euen in this Masse saied withoute commucants matter good cause For as I finde that in the Churche of Constantinople Masse was dailie saied when the people did not communicate so doe I finde a rule made in the auncient Churche what the preist shoulde doo when ther were no

iudicium edat ac bibat sed euidenter ostendere exprimere memoriam eius qui pro nobis mortuus est acresurrexit Yt behoueth A plain place for the Proclamer him that cometh to the bodie and blood of our Lorde to the remeÌ„brance of him that hath died for vs and risen again not onely to be pure from all vnclennesse of bodie and soule least he eate and drinke to his owne condemnacion but he must also euidentlie shewe and declare the memorie of him that hath died for vs and risen again Thus moch S. Basil Nowe wher S. Paule saieth that as often as we eate of that bread and drinke of that cuppe we must declare the death of Chryst S. Basill saieth that he that commeth to the bodie and blood of Chryst must remembre him that What S. Paule calleth bread and cuppe S. Basil calleth the bodie aÌ„d blod of our lord died for vs. So that what S. Paule in termes called this bread and this cuppe S. Basill geuing vs to vnderstand what S. Paule meneth by these termes speaketh by plain woordes calling those thinges as they be in dede the bodie and blood of our Lord. Likewise yt maie be perceaued that S. Basill folowing S. Paule teacheth that the Sacrament ys a memoriall of Chryst as suffring for vs aÌ„d not of Chryst in himself or absolutelie without respect of passion and death suffred for vs which ys asmoch to saie as a memoriall doen in the remembrance of Chrystes passion and death agreablie to the sainges of other before alleadged Rupert also whom we ioin at this present with S. Basill doeth euen likewise vnderstand S. Paule Thus he writeth Sacramentum hoc quo mors eius annunciatur quemadmodum Apostolus dicit quotitscunque manducabitis panem hunc calicem bibetis Rupert in cap. 26. Matth mortem Domini annunciabitis donec veniat quando debuerat condi dari nisi sub ipsius articulo passionis This Sacrament by the which the death of our Lord ys declared as the Apostle saieth As often as ye shall eate this bread and drinke of thys cuppe ye shall shewe furth the death of our Lorde vntill he come when should yt be made and geuen furth but euen at the verie poinct of the same passioÌ„ In thys saing of Rupert the one parte of our saing namely that the Sacrament ys a memorial of Chrystes death ys clerely by expressed woords testified The other part that in the Sacrament the verie bodie and blood ys eaten and dronken Rupert in a Joon We cate the flesh and drinke the blood of Chryst in the remembrance of his death to and for the memoriall of the same death ys not here manifestlie spoken Wherfor we shall heare him in an other place vttering his knowledg in thys matter Thus he saieth Quod fecit ipse hoc idem in commemorationem ipsius scimus et bene scimus nos facere id est carnem ipsius manducare sanguineÌ„ bibere That which Chryst himself did we know and we wel know that we doe euen the verie same thing in the remembrance of him that he did that ys to eate his flesh and drinke his bloode Marke now the learning of Chrystes catholique Church note nowe well what we eate and drinke in the remembrance of Chrystes passion and death Iudge nowe whether S. Paule ment materiall bread as the Sacramentaries wolde haue yt to be vnderstanded and not raither the heauenlie bread of Chrystes bodie to be eateÌ„ in the remeÌ„brance of his passioÌ„ aÌ„d death I haue now produced but fower two of the greke Church and two of the latin Church to geue vs vnderstanding what we ought to remeÌ„bre in the receipt All the rable of the Sacramentaries cannot bring one coople of catholike authours that saie S. Paule spake here of materiall bread of the Sacrament and what in that Sacrament we doe receaue wherupon they all conclude that we receaue the bodie and blood of Chryst in the remembrance of his death and so S. Paule ys to be vnderstaÌ„ded in this place Now let all the whol rable of the Aduersaries side bring furth but two wheras we might as the Aduersarie himself knoweth haue brought manie mo which for the auoiding of more prolixitie wherin we haue allreadie offended we doe ouerpasse and omitte that shal by expresse woordes expownde S. Paule in this place that he ment not the bodie of Chryst but plain materiall bread Let them I saie bring but two catholique approued authours aÌ„d they shall haue the victorie So weake ys their cause besides their owne asseueracion that yt ys verie certen they can not bringe one Although then this ys a trueth receaued of all the holie Fathers of Chrystes Church and ys the doctrine of S. Paule that the bodie and blood of Chryst be receaued according to commaundement in the remembrance of his passion and death and so yt also cometh to passe that the bodie of Christ euen the self same bodie in substance vnder the formes of bread and wine ys JnexpositioÌ„ verborum caenae ObiectioÌ„ of Oecolamp a figure of the self same bodie hanging vpon the crosse and suffring passioÌ„ aÌ„d death yet Oecolampadius after his Sicophants maner he himself either of malice not willing to knowe or ells plainlie ignorant doeth accuse the learned men of Chrystes Church of ignorance that they make the bodie of Chryst both the exemplar and the thing exemplified the figure and the thing figurated the sign and the thing signified for that saieth he relacion must be betwixt two thinges distincted and not of one thing to ytself For euery relatiue must haue a correlatiue To answere him for that I write to the vnlearned to instructe them in the faith I will not vse the quiddities of schooles neither with schoole tearmes The nnswer so darken the matter that the reader shall not vnderstand me but I will vse plain examples And first wher Oecolampadius saieth that relacion must be betwixt two thinges distincted did he not knowe that in the diuine persons Matth. 17 were sundrie relacions grownded vpon the one nature of God But to come to examples in Chryst of whome we nowe dispute was not Chryst transfigured in the mount and shewing himself in a glorionse maner was he not an Theoph. in 17. Math. Chryst one and the same in substaÌ„ce hath ben ys and shal be a sigure of bim self in diuer se maners exemplar or figure of himself now in glorie and of his gloriouse cominge to iudgement Theophilact saieth that Dignitas secundi aduentus in splendore faciei Christi ineffabili claruit The dignitie or excellencie of the second cominge of Chryst did appeare in the vnspeakable brightnesse of the face of Chryst So that Peter Iohn and Iames sawe now in his first coming an image of the glorie of Chryst that he shall come in his second coming Then maie we see that the self same bodie in substance after one maner

ys not taken for that loue that a man flattereth him self to haue when he thinketh he loueth his neighbour but for that charitie that S. Paule spake of when he saied Qui diligit legem impleuit He that loueth hath fullfilled the Lawe This loue causeth a man to ioin in vnitie with God and man Yt causeth obedience to an ordinarie power Yt causeth a man also to flee all corrupt licenciouse and voluptuouse life Wher this charitie ys not be his faith neuer so sownde he ys no woorthie receauer Wherfor Scismatiques and contemners of ordinarie power and voluptuouse or corrupt liuers be no woorthie Two things to be considered in S. Paules woordes receauers Thus moche being saied of woorthie and vnwoorthie receauers ther remaineth two other thinges in S. Paules woordes to be spoken of the one ys what ys receaued the other the peine inflicted for vnwoorthie receauing The thing to be receaued ys signified when he saieth This bread and the cuppe of our Lorde The peine that he shall be giltie of the bodie and blood of our Lorde For the first what the bread and the cuppe of our Lorde ys yt was opened in the exposition of the last scripture that S. Paule ment therby the bodie and bloode of our Lorde Whiche exposition shall here again be verisied and iustified by a nombre of holie Fathers to the entent the trueth receaued in Chrystes Parliament house maie be well knowen and the vntrueth of the aduersarie as well perceaued and seen The second whiche ys the pein inflicted to the vnwoorthie receauer forasmoche as yt shall be plainlie opened and declared by soche auncient writers as I shall alleage I will to auoide prolixitie omitte to speake of yt my self and referre the Reader to the expositions of the Fathers For the whiche consideracion also forasmoche as S. Paule repeteth this text again I haue thought good for the ease of the reader to ioin them together in exposition onelie letting him vnderstand the difference betwixt them that in this text the pein as ys saied of the vnwoorthie receauer ys declared in the other both the pein and the cause also ys opened Of both whiche full declaracion shall be made by the Fathers But before I entre into the exposition of these Fathers I wish the Reader The Sacramentaries abuse S. Paules woordes in two poinctes to vnderstand that the Aduersarie hath also abused this scripture in two poinctes The one that by cause S. Paule calleth the Sacrament bread Therfor yt ys after yt ys consecrated materiall bread the other whiche ys more stowtelie then trulie mainteined they saie that euell men doe not receaue the bodie of Chryst in the Sacrament These their wicked assertions by Gods grace shall be plainlie ouerthrowen For yt shall be ineuitablie proued that by the bread and cuppe that S. Paule speaketh of ys vnderstanded and meaÌ„t the bodie and bloode of Chryst whiche being by S. Paule receaued of euellmen yt must necessarilie folowe that euell men receaue the bodie of Chryst in the Sacra And here maie we see the miserable strictes that men teaching an vntreuth be brought vnto who for the maintenaÌ„ce of that vntrueth are enforced to fall into manie moo For the damnable heresie inuented against the presence of Chryst in the Sacrrment they are compelled to denie the plain woordes of S. Paule as ye shall in the processe perceaue But let vs heare the holie Fathers agreeablie shewing their learninges and faith in vnderstanding S. Paule of the whiche the first coople shall be saincte Cyprian and Origen S. Cyprian writing to certain Martirs and confessours and lamenting the rash admission of certain that had offended to the recipit of the holie Sacrament writeth thus of them so had admitted the offendours Illi contra euan gelii Cypr. li. 3. epist 15. legem vestram quoque honorificam peticionem ante actam paenitentiam ante exomologesin grauissimi atque extremi delicti factam ante manum ab Episcopo clero in paenitentiam impositam offerre pro illis Eucbaristiam dare id est sanctum Domini corpus prophanare audent cÃ¹m scriptum sit Qui ederit panem aut biberit calicem Domini indignÃ¨ reus erit corporis sanguinis Domini They against the lawe of the Gospell and yowr commendable peticion before they had doen penannce before they had made confession of their most greuouse and extreame offence before anie hand was putt vpon them of the Bishoppe and the cleargie vnto penance they were so bolde both to offre for them and also to geue vnto them the Sacrament which ys as moch as to prophane the holie bodie of our Lorde Forasmoch as yt ys written He that eateth the bread and drinketh the cuppe of our Lorde vnwoorthilie shall be giltie of the bodie and blood of our Lorde Of this holie Father and martir S. Cyprian if yowe will learn what ys to minister the Sacrament to anie vnwoorthie person yt ys saieth he to prophane to holie bodie and blood of our Lorde That yt ys prophaned in so doing he prooueth by this scripture of S. Paule He that eateth and drinketh vnwoorthilie shall be giltie of the bodie and bloode of our Lorde A thing ys prophaned when yt being holie ys occupied aboute vnholie or coÌ„mon vses As a church dedicated to God to be made a stable The ornamentes The practise of prophanacioÌ„ ys lament ablie to be seeÌ„ in Englond of the same to be applied to the vanitie of mans pride as to make beddes hanginges or cooshinges The plate of yt as king Balthasar did with the plate of the temple to make them vessells for the bankettes of men So the bodie of our Lorde saieth S. Cyprian ys prophaned forasmoch as yt being holie ys cast into an vnholie thing whiche ys the vnwoorthie receauer Now if by the bread spokeÌ„ of in S. Paules senteÌ„ce were not vnderstaÌ„ded the bodie of our Lorde to what pourpose should S. CypriaÌ„ alleadge that text as therby to prooue the bodie of Chryst prophaned That thing ys prophaned that ys deliuered and so abused Yf theÌ„ not the bodie of our Lorde be deliuered in the SacrameÌ„t but mere materiall bread than ys the bread prophaned and not the bodie But CypriaÌ„ saieth the bodie ys prophaned wherfore the bodie ys deliuered And here I wish the ministers of Chrystes Churche to take hede and to be verie circuÌ„spect that they looke well to whoÌ„ they ministre this holie SacrameÌ„t leest they be dot onelie giltie of the prophanacioÌ„ of the holie bodie of our Lorde but also be in verie dede not feeders but deceauers not deliuerers froÌ„ sinnes but heapers and increacers ther of as S. CypriaÌ„ saieth in the same li 3. epla 15. epistle Ea enim coÌ„cedere quae in pernitieÌ„ vertaÌ„t decipere est Nec erigitur sic lapsus sed per Dei offensam magis impellitur ad ruinam To geue or graunt those thinges that turne to a mans destructioÌ„ ys to deceaue

not repent thee to hear yf thowe desire to knowe the trueth Vpon the text of S. Iohn before treacted of he maketh this exposition Duobus modis dicitur Christus esse panis secundÃ¹m diuinitatem scilicet humanitatatem Euthymins in 6. Ioan. Postquam ergo docuit de modo qui secundÃ¹m diuinitatem est nunc etiam docet de modo qui est secundÃ¹m humanitatem Non autem dixit quem do sed quem dabo Daturus namî€‚ue erat in vltima coena quando sumptum panem actis gratijs fregit deditî€‚ue Discipulis ait Accipitt comedite Hoc est corpus meum Chryste ys saied to be bread two waies that ys after his Godhead and after his manhead Therfore when he had taught the maner whiche ys after his Godhead Nowe dothe he also teache the maner whiche ys after hys manhead For he did not saie which I do geue but which I will geue For he wolde geue yt in the last Supper when thankes being geuen he brake the bread which he had taken and gaue yt to the disciples and saied Take eate this ys my bodie What can the Aduersaries saie against so manifest and so plain a sentence Do not their chekes waâ—e red for shame Ys not blind ignorance or deuelish malice to be laied vnto these men that either do not know the learning of so manie great clerlees or ells yf they knowe do so maliciouslie so deuelish lie preferre their owne arrogant phantasies and opinons and presume to saie the contrarie to that so manie in soch sundrie ages declaring also therby the wholcoÌ„seÌ„t of the church through al Ã¢ges in the same do affirme aÌ„d teach whiche ys that Chryst did treact of and promisse in sixt of Iohn the Sacrament of his bodie and bloode Now gentle Reader wilt thow beleue them in their matters when they be deprehended in soche notable falshead as all the Church doth reprehende them for And yet their falshead shall more appeare by other mo herafter Wherby yt shall most clerely be perceaued that they haue attempted against all trueth to wrest the sixt chapiter of saincte Iohn from the Sacrament And so shalt thowe se howe farre they haue swarued and doo swarue from the treuth THE FIFTH CHAPITER PROCEADETH VPON the same text by saincte Augustin and Chrysostome THat ye maie see more of the vnderstaÌ„ding of this text an other coople shall be produced to shewe yow howe this place of IhoÌ„ ys vnderstanded The first of them shall be famouse Augustine who saieth thus Mensa sponsi tui panem habet integrum poculum sanctuÌ„ quem paneÌ„ etsi fractuÌ„ comminutumî€‚ue vidimus integrÃ¨ tamen cum August de cultura agri Dominici ipso suo Patre manet in caelis De quo pane dicit Panis quem ego daho caro mea est pro mun di vita The table of thy spouse hath perfect or pure bread and an holie cuppe Whiche bread although we haue seen broken and bruysed on the crosse yet yt abydeth with that his Father wholl in heauen Of the whiche bread he saieth The bread that I will geue ys my flesh whiche I will geue for the life of the worlde S. Augustine speaking here to the spouse of Chryste saieth that the table of her Spouse or husbande hath a perfect bread The bread on the table of Chryste what ys yt but the Sacrament Of this bread whiche ys the Sacrament in the table of Chryste the same Chryste saieth S. Augustine saieth The bread whiche I will geue ys my flesh By which woordes yt ys ineuitablie manifest that that sentence of S. Iohn ys spoken of the Sacrament But nowe whether yt be spoken of the SacrameÌ„t as of a bare signe which signe as the Aduersaries alleage as other signes likewise dothe but take the name of the thing that yt ys the signe of or no let vs searche by sainct Augustine here Yt ys euident that saincte Augustine here teacheth that yt ys spoken of the verie thing whiche ys signified and not of the bare signe For S. Augustine speaking of the bread and that of one bread dothe declare yt to All one bodie that was broken on the Crosse ys with the Father in heauen and on the altar be and to haue ben in three sundrie places that ys on the table on the crosse and in heauen with his Father The Sacrament that ys the externe signe was neither on the crosse neither ys in heauen Wherfore yt ys the verie bodie of Chryste which was vpon the crosse and ys with the Father in heauen that ys nowe on the table of Chryste For note the saing well and ye shall finde that he speaketh but of one bread For when he had spoken of yt as being on the table he speaketh again of the same by the relatiue saing which bread although we haue seen broken on the crosse A relatiue as the grammarian knoweth maketh rehersall of a thing spokeÌ„ of before Then when he saied whiche he speaketh of the bread on the table So that by S. Augustine that same bread that ys on the table ys yt whiche was broken on the crosse And that that was broken on the crosse ys yt that ys wholle sitting in heauen with the Father Wherbie yt ys consequent that yt ys the same and verie bodie of Chryste that ys on the table that was vpon the crosse and ys at the right hande of God the Father As saincte Augustine in fewe woordes hath pithilie touched that that we here seke namelie that this place of the sixt chapiter of saincte Iohn speaketh of the Sacrament and yet not of the Sacrament as of a bare signe but of the verie bodie of Chryste and of the same dodie by the name of bread spake the sentence The Bread whiche I will geue ys my flesh So I breiflie haue touched and noted the same to yowe hasting to heare the sainges and expositions of Chrysostome vpon the same text Chrysostome after he had in his learned maner declared in his 44 home lie that Chryste spake this texte of S. Iohn which we treact of nowe of his bodie when he cometh to the same in his owne place after he had repreheÌ„ded the Iewes for their incredulitie and slacknes in the beleif of Chrystes woordes saieth that they therfore tooke no profitte of them Illi tunc temporis Chrysost hom 45. in Ioan. nihil ex ijs dictis nos illius beneficij vtilitatem cepimus Quare necessariÃ² dicendum quÃ m admiranda misteria cur data sint quae eorum vtilitas They at that time tooke nothing by those woordes we haue taken the profitt of the benefitte wherfore necessarilie yt ys to be saied howe wonderfull the misteries be and wherfore they be geuen and what ys the profitt of them These woordes Chrysostome speaketh vpon the woordes of Chryste The bread which I will geue ys my flesh In the whiche woordes forsomuche as Chryste saied he wolde geue his flesh Chrysostom

saieth they be wonderfull mysteries And therfore he wolde searche the cause why he gaue them and what profitt cometh to vs by them And immediatelie as a cause whie Chryste gaue vnto vs this misterie the bread whiche ys his flesh the said Chrysostom adioineth this sentence of saincte Paule Vnum corpus sumus membra ex carne ossibus eius We are one bodie and membres of his flesh and of his bones And that he wolde not be mistaken but that these woordes be spoken of the receipt of that breade that Chryste gaue whiche ys his flesh he more plainlie vttereth his mening expownding the former woordes thus Vt auteÌ„ non solÃ¹m per dilectioneÌ„ sed reipsa in illam carnem conuertamur per cibum id efficitur quem nobis largitus est That we shoulde not onelie by loue but in verie dede be turned into that flesh that ys brought to passe by the meate whiche he hath graunted vs. Thus Chrysostome Chrystes flesh turneth vs into yt And what meate did he graunte vs euen that that he frelie promised to geue vs a bread whiche ys his flesh whiche flesh being oure heauenly and spirituall meat contrary to the ordre of carnall foode whiche receaued ys turned into vs and not we into yt turneth vs into the flesh of Chryste as yt was saied to saincte Augustine Nec tu me mutabis in te sicut cibum carnis tuae sed tu mutaberis in me Neither shalt thowe chaunge me into thee as the meate of thy flesh but thowe shalt be chaunged into me And this ys one cause why Chryste gaue vs this wonderfull misterie as Chrysostome right godlie termeth yt He addeth also an other cause of the geuing of this great mistery vnto vs whiche ys this CÃ¹m enim suum in nos amorem indicare vellet per corpus suum se The same flesh and blood that Chryst tooke of ourna ture he geueth vt again nobis commiscuit in vnum nobiscum redegit vt corpus cum capite vniretur When he wolde shewe furth his loue towardes vs by his bodie he mingled him self with vs and brought him self into one with vs that the bodie might be vnited with the head Thus muche Chrysost Marke his woordes that Chryste By his bodie hath mingled himself with vs. whiche bodie ys not a phantasticall bodie but his verie reall bodie as the same Chrysostome after goodlie examples godlie setting furth the matter speaketh in the person of Chryste Vester ego frater esse volui communicaui carnem propter vos sanguinem per quae vobis coiunctus sum ea rursus vobis exhibui I wolde be yowr brother and for yowr sakes I tooke flesh and bloode with yowe and by what thinges I was conioined to yowe those thinges again I haue geuen vnto yowe Weigh this golden sentence with me gentle Reader I beseche thee weigh yt well and see whether we receaue but a peice of bread in the holie Sacrament or not Yt ys most certen that Chryste tooke not a phantasticall bodie as the Maniches here toforesaied but a verie true bodie of verie flesh and verie bloode and was in all thinges fownde a verie maÌ„ saue onelie that he lacked sinne and hauinge soche flesh and soche bloode he must nedes A plain place of Chrysost for the Proclamer beioined to vs as one of our nature and kinde a verie man as we be Yf theÌ„ he gaue vnto vs those thinges by the whiche he was conioined to vs he was conioined to vs by verie substanciall fleshe and bloode wherfore he gaue vnto vs his verie substanciall flesh and bloode Yf he gaue as the aduersarie saieth vnto vs his flesh but onelie in a sign then he gaue not his verie flesh in dede But he was not conioined to vs by flesh and bloode in a signe onelie Wherfore he giueth vs not his flesh and bloode in a sign onelie And again as some other do saie he geueth vs his flesh and bloode that ys the benefitte the merite and grace of his flesh and bloode and not his verie reall flesh and bloode I denie not but he geueth vs the merite of his passion fuffred in his flesh and shedinge of his most preciouse bloode but that ys not imparted and geueÌ„ to vs onelie in the Sacrament of his blessed bodie and bloode but also in other sacramentes As in Baptisme we haue remissioÌ„ of sinnes both originall and actuall from the whiche we be washed in his bloode Lauit nos Ã peccatis nostris in sanguine suo He hath washed vs from Apocal. 1 Receipt of Chrystes merites not propre to one but coÌ„mon to all sacrameÌ„tes oure sinnes in his blood So haue we also in the sacrameÌ„t of penaunce wher also we haue remission of sinnes by the merite of Chrystes passion And breif lie all the sacramentes haue their efficacie power and strenght of the merites of Chrystes passion So that to haue the meritie of Chrystes passion ys not the propre benefitt that cometh to vs by the receipt of this Sacrament of the bodie and bloode of Chryste but ys a benefitt geuen to vs in the ministracion and due receauing of all other sacramentes But the propre benefit of this sacrament ys to receaue the verie bodie of Chryste as a singular pledge and token of his loue who voucheth saif for the vnmeasurable loue that he beareth to vs not onelie to be with vs by his sign or token but as vehement and perpetuall loue requireth to be with vs by his verie presence and that we receauing him shoulde be turned into his fleshe wherby as S. Hilarie saieth we are naturallie in him as he ys naturallie In vs being mebres of his hodie of his flesh and of his bones yea aÌ„d into that flesh whiche as Cyrill saieth ys viuifica that ys geuing life or making to liue euerlastinglie according to his owne promisse Qui manducat me viaet propter me he that eateth me shall liue by means of me These be the benefittes propre vnto this Sacrament as Chrysostome hath rehersed who also proceading declareth the great and wonderfull excellencie of this Sacrament and a nombre of other benefittes ensewing to vs by the receipt of the same Whose processe although yt be somwhat longâ—â€¦ yet for that yt declareth moste manifestlie the trueth of Chrystes presence in the Sacrament and most godlie commending the same teacheth vs not onelie to reuerence yt in our heartes and also by mouthe reuerentlie to speake of yt whiche bothe two haue moche decaied in these daies but also moueth spirituall delectacion in the heart of the true chrystian I trust yt shall not be tedious to the Reader in readinge And therfore shall I more gladlie take paines in the writing When Chrysostom had spoken moche of the flesh of Chryste of whiche some parte ye haue nowe hearde He cometh to speake of his bloode of the which ye shall nowe heare Thus he writeth Hic sanguis sacit

Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Text snippets containing the quad