his vvit and memorie be but very indifferent especially vvhen he is first vvarned by the minister and after seeth the bread and vvine conceive thus much as vvel as the most honest man in the congregation For let M. B. marke vvel vvhat it is to eate Christ spiritually in their sacrament By his ovvne definition and the coÌ„mon consent of his maisters this eating hath no relation or dependence of charitie of honestie of vertue of good life but only of faith Bring with yow to the table saith M. B. not one mouth only of your body but also the mouth of the sawle VVhat is that A constant persuasion in the death of Christ and al goes wel This persuasion my Protestant of vvhom I speake vvanteth not For I presuppose him to be no apostata though I graunt him to be an heretike and therefore he doubtles hath this mouth of his sawle and therefore eates Christ and so al goes wel Again As the mouth of thy body takes the bread so them â—â—â— of thy â—awle takes the body and blud of Christ by faith For by faith and a constant persuasion is the only way to eate the body and drinke the blud of Christ â—nwardly Then inwardly doth this evil Protestant eate Christs body and inwardly doth he drinke his blud For being a Christian though a bad one he must needs have a faith and constant persuasion of Christs death Christ saith Peter Martyr in the 6. of S. thou promised to gâ—ve his flesh to be eaten And that which he then promised he performed in his lâ—st supper But not then only He also performeth it now so often as we truly beleeve that he hath dyed for vs. VVhat need I repeatâ— that vvhich is most evident that the vvicked have this faith of beleeving Christs death therefore eaâ—e spiritually the flesh of Christ Calvin goeth one point further requiring that they beleeve Christ not only to have died vvhich only M. B. and Peter Martyr vâ—ge but also that he beleeve Christ to have risen again VVhâ—â—â—as I sinâ— in Beza is a question of great 〈◊〉 and not beleeved of many Protestants But yet I presuppose â—â—â— Protestant not to be proceeded so far but â—esting in the vulgar heresies of Calvins Institutions or the Scottish confession of faith not to deny Christs death or resurrection and then nothing yet is said but that he eateth Christ truly by faith be his life never so detestable And thus vvhereas M. B. saith that no evil receive Christ I must conclude rather that al evil receive him after their doctrine as now appeareth But yet remaineth one farther subtilitie vvhich M. B. afterwards toucheth and greatly magnifieth Learne me saith he to applie Christ rightly to thy sowle and thâ—w hâ—â— wonne al thow art a great Theologe Let vs in the name of God learne this high mystical point Is there any other applicatioÌ„ of Christ then by faith by beleeving his death and rejurrection No doubtles as Calvin Beza Martyr M. B. him self have often told vs. Then this is not so mystical a point nor able to make so great a Theologe except every â—inker and cobler that beleeves his Creed be among the Protestants a great Theologe because perhaps most of their chief Ministers and preachers beleeve not so much Na saith M. B. there is yet a farther degree deeper mysterie in this eating and application Let vs once have a plaine descriptioÌ„ thereof that we may know vvhere to rest and vvherevnto vve shal trust That M. B. geveth in these vvords The eating and drinking of the sowle is no other thing but the applying of Christ to my sowle the applying of his death and passion to my sowle Yet this must be made somwhat more plaine and intelligible For as M. B. obiecteth afterwards Christ him self his body and blud can not be geuen or applied to thee seing that looke how great distance is betwixt heaven and earth as great distance is there betwene the body of Christ and thy body or sowle even so touching Christs death passion that is now long sithence past and as the Apostle teacheth he being risen from death dieth no more but liveth at the right hand of God â—â—â—nally and how then applâ—e yow his death and passion to â—â—â—â— sowle Thus and this must vve take for the chief last resolution vvhich this man here geveth vs and vvhich 〈◊〉 learned maketh vs great and profound Theologes The eating of the sawle is no other thing but â—â—e applying of Christ to the sawle that is to beleeve that he hath shed his blud for me that he hath purchased remission of sinnes for me This as being the very key and summe of that he preacheth concerning this matter in his next sermon he enlargeth thus VVe eate the flesh of Christ by faith and drinke his blud chiefly in doing two things first in calling to remembrance Christs death and passion how he dyed for vs. The second point of this spiritual eating stands in this that I and every one of yow beleeve firmely that he died for me in particular that his blud was shed on the crosse for a ful remission and redemption of me and my sinnes In this staÌ„ds the chief principal point of eating Christs flesh VVel then now vve know a thorough perâ—ite definition and explication of this spiritual eating and drinking to vvit that every man in particular is bound to beleeve that Christ died for him for so I interpret M. B. his meaning and not that every man is bound to beleeve that Christ died for M. B. shed his blud for M. B. and purchased remission of sinnes for him as his vvords sound to conclude my purpose I say vvhat Protestant if he be a Christian doth not thus applie Christ vnto him self doth not thus eate the body of Christ and drinke his blud except he be in desperatioÌ„ or as hath bene said be an Apostata so no Christian For no man can have the name of a Christian â—â—cept he beleeve the death of Christ vvhich vvas suffered according to Christs owne teaching his Apostles both for the sinnes of every particular Christian also of the vvhole vvorld He is the lamb of God which taketh away the sinnes of the world He came in to the vvorld and vvas incarnate to save his people from their sinnes To Christ al â—he prophetes geve testimonie that al receive remission of sinnes by his name vvhich beleeve in him He is the raunsom and propitiation for our sinnes and not for ours only but also for the whole world and so forth in every Gospel Epistle and almost in every chapter of ether Gospel or Epistle so plainly that no creature having the name of a Christian can doubt but Christ died for him and by his death purchased remission of his sinnes therefore every Christian be he never so evil applieth Christ
meane wit or sense of Christianitie ever wrote or affirmed that Gods vvord could not be heard fruitfully but of such men as vvere first indued with the love of god and then vvith the love of their neighbour in and for god and had such other vertuous dispositions as here yow require in your communicants Doth not the vvhole course and scope of the new testament shew infinit dissimilitude betwene the vvord of God and this sacrament of God in this respect vvithal resel this your to grosse folie VVhereas the sacrament in the verie place by yow read to your auditors if ye read truly is peculiarly appointed for the good and holy those that have tried and examined vvel them selves contrariwise is not the vvord of God by Gods like ordinance indifferent as vvel to the vnholy as holy to the bad as to the good as vvel to correct the one as to preserve the other to illuminate the faithles as to continue the light kindled in the faithful Do not the vvritings and preachings of Christ and his Apostles confirme this â— Preached they not alike to Iew Gentil to Idolaters to Pagans to sacrilegious persons of al sorts blind for their faith and abominable for their life vvhereof many knew not God much lesse loved him and so could not love their neighbour for him And yet this preaching doubtles vvas vvithout al sinne ether in the Apostles vvho thus preached indifferently to al or in the disciples vvere they Iewes or Gentils vvho heard them In the first primitiue church vvhich vvas immediatly planted by the Apostles preaching of the vvord vvas stil publike vniversal to Heathen no lesse them Christiâ— after for the space of 400. yeres the same maner of preaching the vvord continued vvith expresse order taken by the church by hundreds of bisâ—hops in very general Synodes that nether Pagan nor Iew nor heretike should be excluded from the presence and communication thereof from hearing the word of god vvhen as by precise order both of the Apostles and their successors pastors and rulers of the church al not only heathen Iewes heretikes but also novices in the Christian faith so long as they vvere vnbaptized vvere diligently excluded from being present at or seing the administration of the holy sacrament So that most salse it is like preparation to be required for receiuing the vvord and the sacrament and so to say cleane dasheth and destroyeth both these last sermons induceth the plain opposite of that this maÌ„ vvould seeme to persuade For if no other preparation be necessarie for the sacrameÌ„t then for the simple vvorde it being most cleare and certain that Christ his Apostles al auncient Bisshops vvithout any sinne or offence of any part ether of the preacher or of the heater preached the vvord to Ievves Gentils idolaters vsurers adulterers publicans men and vvomen living in al sinne of body and sowle hereof the deduction is manifest that by like reason the sacrament vvithout sinne of ether part may be delivered and received of Iewes of Gentils of Idolaters of adulterers of vsurers of slannderers of men never so sinful and vvicked VVith vvhich qualities albeit perhaps the elect bretherne of Calvins institution be commonly indued vvho vsually as M. B. vvitnesseth fal in to such grosse sinnes not only seven times but even seventie times seven times that is almost five hundred times every day yet thus to instruct and teach them and namely at such tyme and place was a very vnfit vvay of preparation to vvorthy receiving of the sacrament for vvhich by this doctrine any preparation suffiseth to vvhich they can never come vnworthely nor receive it to their condemnation no more then Marie Magdalen the sinful vvoman or other publicans vsurers and sinners received the vvord of Christ or his Apostles to their condemnation And this may stand for an evideÌ„t exaÌ„ple of a more general repugnaÌ„ce vvherein pretending honour to the sacrament he most dishonoreth it and vvhile at large he persuadeth great care of preparation he shortly but pithily dissuadeth the same causeth his auditors to neglect castavvay al such care Now to end this matter let vs consider one other like general example vvherein he vniversally both gainsaieth him self marreth al his deuout preaching and setteth his auditors in the high vvay to al audacitie licence libertie and fleshly securitie Towards the end of his secoÌ„d sermoÌ„ thus he armeth them against al tentatioÌ„s and teacheth them how they shal find repose in their conscience be their sinnes never so great their contempt of God and despising of his commaundements never so notorious and horrible and their owne conscience never so vehemently accusing them thereof VVhen saith he the devil thy owne life and conscience accuseth thee and beareth witnes against thee go backe ouer again to thy bygane experience cast over thy memorie and remember if god at any time in any sort hath loved thee if ever thow felt the love and favour of god in thy hart c. Remember on this and repose thy assurance on this that as he loved thee ains he wil love the ay and wil assuredly restore thee to that love or thow dye The hart that felt ains the loue of god shal feele it again And looke what gift or grace or what taist of the power of the world to come that euer the lord gave to his creatures in this life to that same degree of mercy he shal restore his creature or ever it depart this life This lesson he vvilleth his audience to locke vp in their harts remember on it faithfully as a most vvorthy comfort and me â—icament for their conscience I vvil not spend time in reâ—uting this strauâ—ge doctrine nether how it contrarieth the scripture of the Apostles and Euangelists in a number of places And yet I may no let passe briefly to vvarne the â—eader that not only in the thing and substance of the matter but also in the very forme of vvords and maner of phrase most vvickedly yea like a flat Apostata enemy of the Apostles al Apostolical doctrine he directly opposeth him self to the Apostle For vvhereas S. Paule saith that such Christians as have once bene made partakers of gods graces and gifts and have taisted the word of god and power of the world â—â— come vvhen such men become Apostataes and fal from God it is impossible for them to recover their former estate and grace M. B. running ful but against the Apostle saith in the same vvords phrase that such as have once receiued the grace gift of the holy ghost or taisted the power of the world to come fal they never so desperatly in to vvhat dissolution of body and sowle soeuer most certain and sure it is that before their death they shal recover be restored to the same grace degree of mercy againe Yea vvhich is far more vvonderful and far
by S. Cyprian and Bibliander 1. that in place of al the auncient legal sacrifices should succede in the new testameÌ„t an eucharistical sacrifice in bread wine 2. that that bread wine should be the true flesh blud of the Messias 3. that in such sacrifice should consist the priesthod according to the order of Melchisedech Al which might easelie plainely inough be deduced out of the scriptures for if Melchisedech so offered in prefiguration of Christ Christ must needes likewise so offer to fulfil that figure which being neuer by Christ accoÌ„plished but at his last supper most sure certain it is that there he offered after the order of Melchisedech were it not that the Protestants especially the Sacramentaries herein cheifly in the first original ground of all the rest that is in the sacrifice of Melchisedech meÌ„tioned in Genesis shew them selues incredible wranglers Sophisters in cauilling vpon the Hebrew letter without al reason ground heretikes beyond measure in trusting to them selues alone condemning al others who since the time of Melchisedech both Hebrewes Christians haue acknowledged in this place a sacrifice Amongst which heretikes the chief both Caluin Zuingli very saucely impudeÌ„tly shame not to say that in this matter al the auncient fathers writers wrote spake without iudgement more vainlâ— then vanitie it self not content with Christs institution the wisdom of god inuented the oblatioÌ„ of their owne heads They al erred in so belâ—â—â—ing writing deuised to them selues a sacrifice whereof Moses the holy Gost neuer thought They followed there owne inuentions saw lesse in the scriptures then the rude ignorant people And Illyâ—icus that they in so expounding the scriptures violently naughtely hunted after allegories as was always their fashion Although our English doctor doctor Iewel whose Theologie consisted vpon words phrases haue a farther shift peculier to him selfe beyond al other vz. that the Hebrew word vsed by Moyses is doubtful signifieth as wel a prince as a priest therefore nether priesthod nor sacrifice could necessarily be inferred thereof VVhich is a right way to checke reproue both the prophet Dauid Apostle Paule who long sithence determined the Hebrew word to one certain signification which I suppose they knew somwhat better then M. Iewel did The declaration of which matter to make it plaine to common capacities because it would require some longer time then I thinke needeful to spend for that it is somwhat obscure subtile dependeth vpon gramatical cauils of the Hebrew toÌ„ge I wil here omit especially for that otherwise sufficient seemeth to haue bene said of the words of Christs supper which are also so very manifest euident of them selues that the more learned gospellers from the first original of this new gospel haue stood in defence of the real presence do at this present against the tropical construction of the Caluinists VVherefore ceasing to speake any more hereof I wil procede on as I intended to shew the continuance of this beleefe if yet first I shal note in a word or two that Christs speach vttered in the institution of this sacrament cary such weight to induce establish a sactifice that so much in part is confessed graunted by Ihon Caluin him selfe who in his coÌ„mentarie vpon the words of the Apostle S. Paule Corpus quod pro vobis frangitur The body which is broken for yow writeth thus This is not lightly to be passed ouer For Christ geueth vs not his body sleightly or without any condition adioyned but he geueth it as sacrificed for vs. VVhere ore the first part of this sentence declareth that the body of Christ is deliuered or exhibited to vs the second part expresseth what fruit cometh to vs thereby to wit that thereby we are made partakers of the redemption wrought by Christ the benefit of his sacrificess applied to vs. VVhich words how soeuer he vnderstand them signifie wel truly that Christ in that his last supper deliuered his blessed body to his disciples in them to al Christians not as borne of the virgin not as conversant in this world not as risen from death ascending to heauen or sitting there on gods right hand but as offered to god sacrificed for vs to the end that by that coÌ„memoratiue sacrifice the fruite of Christs redemption procured vniuersally to al mankind by his death on the crosse might be really effectually applied to al faithfull Christians members of Christs catholike church who haue coÌ„munication in that sacrifice ¶ And thus with this opinion was this sacrament practised by the Apostles in the first Apostolical church immediatly after Christ as we learne by S. Luke the Apostle S. Paule by S. Luke when he noteth in the Actes of the Apostles that the holy Ghost chose out certaine of them as they were doing publike service ministerie to our lord ministrantibê° illis domino VVhere the word vsed by the Evangelist signifieth a publike ministerie service of the church such as properly the sacrifice is And therefore Erasmus translateth it according to the proper signification of the Greeke word sacrificantibus illis domino while they were doing sacrifice to our lord VVhich Beza also could be content to admit were it not it draweth to nigh to the church sacrifice But howsoeuer in that respect he refuseth it sure it is al the old fathers Apostolike men from thence in that sense called the christian sacrifice or masse the Liturgie as the Liturgie or masse of S. Iames the Liturgie or masse of S. Basil the Liturgie or masse of S. Chrysost as also Erasmus doth interprete it in this sense of a publike sacrifice doth S. Luke otherwhere vse the word S. Paule by this word properly expresseth our Sauiours priesthod and his most publike general sacrifice VVhich Apostle also mentioneth this the Church sacrifice when as writing to the christians of Corinth he dehorteth them from coÌ„municating with the Gentiles in their idolatrous sacrifices by an argument taken from the nature of al sacrifices the excellencie of this Christian sacrifice For the nature of al sacrifices is to ioyne the coÌ„municants with him vnto whom the sacrifice is offered whether it be god or the deuil As among the Iewes saith the Apostle they which did eate of the thing sacrificed were thereby made partakers of the sacrifice by such sacrifice did concrre to the honor of the true god in like sort they which take part of things ofsered to Idols thereby are made partakers of the Idolatrous sacrifice so together with idolaters honor the deuil Then how straunge a thing is it that yow who partake of the table sacrifice of Christ who there coÌ„municate receiue his pretious body and blud for the chalice there blessed is the coÌ„munication
so taught the new sacrifice of the new testament which the church receiuing from the Apostles doth offer to god through the whole world Of which sacrifice the prophete Malachie foreprophecied thus I haue no liking in yow saith our lord almightie nether wil I take sacrifice of your hand o ye Iewes because from the rising of the Sunne to the going doune of the same my name is glorified among the Gentils incense is offered to my name in euerie place and a pure sacrifice The same argument and dedustion I haue noted before out of S. Cyprianâ— First that Christ our lord and god him selfe was high priest of god the father and he first of al offered him selfe a sacrifice to his father â—â—â—â—s last supper and commaunded the same to be done in commemoration of him Next that such priests occupie the place of Chist truly who do that which Christ did and then in the church offer they to god the father true ful sacrifice if they so offer as they see Christ him selfe to haue offered About some 100. yeres after S. Cyprian vvas gathered the first general Councel of Nice and about a hundreth yeres after that of Nice vvas the first general Councel of Ephesus in vvhich the bishops there assembled thus vtter their faith that is the faith of the vniuersal catholike church in this matter The vvoids of that most auncient Apostolical Councel of Nice are On the diuine table let vs not basely regard the bread and cup set there but lifting vp our myndeâ— let vs by faith vnderstand that on that holy table is placed the lamb of god which taketh away the sinnes of the world who there is without effusion of blud sacrificed by the priests and that we truly receiue his preticus body and blud beleeuing these to be the pledges of our resurrection The vvords of the other general Councel of Ephesus are to the same effect thus VVe confessing the death of Christ according to his flesh his resurrection and ascension into heauen confesse withal and celebrate in the church the holy liâ—eâ—â—uing and vnbluddy sacrifice beleeuing that which is set before vs not to be the body of a common man like to vs as nether is that pretious blud but rather we receiue that as the proper body blud of the word which geueth life For common flesh can not geue life as him selfe witnesseth saying flesh profiteth nothing it is the spirite that geueth life For because it is made the proper flesh of the word for this reason it is lifegeuing according to that our Sauiour him selfe â—aith As my liuing father hath sent me I liue by the father he that eateth me he shal liue by me This faith I say of Sacrament sacrifice in al sinceritie simplicitie thus passed on so vniuersally knovven beleeued that as vvriteth S. Leo in Italie S. Augustin in Africa very children vvere taught to acknovvledge the true flesh and blud of Christ to be offered in the sacrifice of the masse Tovvards 800. yeres after Christ one Bertram a litle before him one Scot â—s vvrote darkly of the truth of this sacrament Of the vvritings of the one of these nothing I thinke remayneth of the other a litle doth but the same vttered so doubtfully that as the Zuinglians vse his authoritie against the Catholikes so the Lutherans vse him to the contrarie yea they in maner reproue him as fauoring to much the faith of the Catholikes For of him Illyricus vvith his bretherne say that he hath in that his litle booke semina transubstantiationis the seedes original ground of transubstantiation But vvhat soeuer his priuate opinion vvere his publike speaches and vvriting â—ounded soâ—il in the eares of the Catholiks of that age that Paschasius an Abbat in France made a verie learned booke in refutation of him And al vvriters vvho about that age vvrote of this mysterie vsed more expresly to denâ—e the sacrament to be a signe trope figure image symbole c. in such sort as vvhereby the veritie of the real presence might be excluded as appeareth in the seuenth general Councel in Alcuinus scholemaister to Charles the great in Rabaâ—â—â— archbishop of Ments lib. de diuinis officijs Theophilact in Matth. 26. Marc. 14. Ioan. 6. Aâ—alarius Arch-bishop of â—reuirs lib. de mysterijs missae cap. 24. 25. Haymo bishop of Halberstat in 1. ad Corinth ca. 10. Remigâ—ê° bishop of Antissiodorum in Canonem missae Fulbertus bisshop of Chartres in epistola ad Adelman episcopum in lib. Paschasij Stephanus bishop in high Buâ—gundie Tom. 4. bibliothâ—cae Sanctorum patrâ—m and briefely al other that vvrote betvvene the time of Bertram Berengarius ¶ For after Bertram the next that appeared in fauour of this heresie vvas Berengarius vvho put forth him self a little after the yere of our lord 1000. vvhen as S. Ihon vvriteth in his Apocalyps the deuil was let lose to trouble the church This man as vvitnesseth our martyr-maker M. Fox like to those first heretiks in the Apostles tymes toke away the veritie of the body blud of Christ from the sacrament For vvhich cause he coÌ„mendeth him as a singular instrument whom the holy ghost raised vp in the church to ouerthrow great errors VVhat instrument he vvas vvhom he serued shal best appeare by his ovvne behauiour confession In the meane season this old heresie he published vvith greater industrie shevv of learning then his predecessors countenanced it with more credit assistance of many vnstable sowles and sinful persons as is noted by the godly and learned writerâ— of that tyme vvhich only kind of men ioyned them selues to him and that because his doctrine seemed to yeld them some quietnes securitie in their sinne from vvhich they vvere much withdravven by a reuerend feare and dread vvhich they had of Christs presence in the sacrament to the receauing vvhereof they vvere by order of the church at certaine times induced But as the heresie of this man spread farther then any of that kind in any age before so the church vsed more diligence in repressing the same by sundry publike disputations had vvith the same Berengarius by a number of most excellent vvriters against him among vvhom Lanfâ—ancus archbishop of Canterbury in England Guitmundus bisshop of Auersa in the kingdom of Naples Algerus a monke in Fraunce in that verie time excelled the supreme pastors of the church assembled sundry great synodes meetings of byshops and other doctors to discusse that opinion instruct those that erred after him first at Tours in Fraunce next at Vercellis in Italie then againe at Tours vvhere Berengariê° him selfe being manifestly conuicted 〈…〉 a solemne oth neuer to maintaine his former heresie VVhich oth vvhen as yet he performed not but returned to his former filth an other Councel vvas gathered in Rome of 113.
iudgement hath at al times among the learned bene much esteemed with whom the Catholike writers D. Allen Cardinal D. Harding D. Sanders D. Stapleton c. vvhom he termeth the yonge Louâ—nian Clergy may not wel compare in the profound knowledge of the Doctors without blushing VVherefore this man so wel esteemed among the learned of so profound knowledge in the Doctors concerning this matter vvriteth thus Protesting his ovvne faith vz that he had rather be drawen in peeces then to become of Berengarius opinion and thinke of the sacrament as the Zuinglians do that he vvold rather susteine al miserie then to defile his conscience vvith so fowle a sinne therein depart out of this life the reasons of this his constant persuasion thus he yeldeth I could neuer be induced to beleeue otherwise then that the true body of Christ was in the sacrament for that the writings of the gospel Apostles expresse so plainly The body which is geuen The blud which is shed for that this thing so wonderful wel agreeth with the infinite loue of God towards mankind that whom he redeemed with the body and blud of his sonne those after an inexplicable maner he should also feed with the body blud of the same his sonne and by this secrete presence of him at is were with a sure pawne or pledge comfort them vntil he shal returne manifest and glorious in the sight of al. Thus for the scriptures the gospels and S. Paule and the cleare euidence of this faith touching the sacrament vttered by them vvhich vvas to him as he vvriteth an vnmoueable foundation to ground vpon Novv for the auncient fathers Councels of the church thus he procedeth Seing then we haue so manifest warrant from Christ and S. Paule whereas besides it is most evidently proued that the auncient writers vnto whom not without cause the church yeldeth so great credit beleeued with one consent that in the Eucharist is the true substance of Christs body blud whereas vnto al this is ioyned the constant authoritie of Councels and so great consent of Christian people let vs also be of the same mynd concerning this heauenly misterie and let vs in a darke sort feed of that bread and cup of our lord vntil we come to eate and drinke it after another sort in the kingdome of God And I wish with al my hart that they who haue folowed Berengarius in his error wold also folow him in his repentance Thus Erasmus a man of profound knowledge in the auncient Doctors vvith vvhom if the yonge Doctors of the Catholike Clergie may not wel compare without blushing much lesse may the yonge scholers preachers of the Scottish and English congregations vvho for sound learning substance of Diuinitie so long as they liue I suppose vvil not be vvorthy to carie the books after those former And therefore being content that on both sides such great peerles authoritie be geuen to Erasmê° as M. Ievvel chalengeth for him thereof I coÌ„clude that the auncient fathers according to the plaine scriptures alvvaies thought and taught that in the holy Eucharist is the substance of Christs body and blud that a Christian man vvere better to suffer any torment and most cruel kind of death then to be of an other opinion And vvith Erasmus I vvish and our Lord of his mercy graunt that those of our poore Iland both English and Scottish who haue folowed Berengarius in his impudent error for so Erasmus termeth it may also foloâ— him in his repentance execration of the same impudent error whereunto Erasmus persuadeth them OF BERENGARIVS HERESIE RENEVVED IN THIS AGE The Argument Luther is to be accompted in some sort the very original ground and cause of the Berengarian heresie renewed in our time But more precisely directly Carolostadius a wicked man and very familiar with the devil and altogether possessed of him To whom succeded Zuinglius and after him Oecolampadi agreing with Carolostadius in substance of denying Christs presence but differing in particular interpretation of Christs words touching the institution of the sacrament Diuers other interpretations of Christs words one against an other al which are iustified by Zuinglius for that they al concurre to remoue from the sacrament the real presence and establish in steed thereof a mere priuatiue absence As the auncient fathers both Greeke and Latine in the primitiue church attribute the real presence of Christ in the sacrament to the vertue force of Christs words vsed in the consecration so the Sacramentaries by a contrarie opinioÌ„ account such consecration magical and therefore remoue the words of Christ teaching their Sacrament to be made as wel without them as with them Examples of the sacramentarie Communion practised without the words of Christ by the Protestants of England Scotland Zuizzerland and els where which they both by their practise writing iustifie as a very ful and perfite communion The resolution of the church of Geneua that the supper may be ministred in any kind of meate drinke as wel as in bread and wyne VVhereof is inferred that according to the Protestant doctrine that 2. or 3. Euangelical gossips meeting together to refresh them selues eating such vitails as they bring with them haue as true perfite a Communion as the Sacramentaries haue any both touching matter forme also a lawful Minister which ministerie or priesthod euen to preach minister their sacraments the Protestant-gospel alloweth to wemen no lesse then to men CHAP. 2. HAuing novv declared the truth of the Catholike beleef touching the blessed sacrament hovv the faith thereof vvas continued from the first primitiue church of Christ and his Apostles vvith very smale gainsaying in the first thousand yeres somvvhat more in the next 500 vntil the time of our fathers vvherein Luther certaine other vvith him began that vvhich novv is called the Gospel by the Protestants but an vniuersal gulph of heresie and Apostasie by Catholiks it resteth that I plainly sett forth hovv that heresie of Berengarius novv maynteyned in England Scotland began first vvhen Luther broched this nevv Gospel ¶ The original hereof is to be referred to Luther him self noâ— only in general for that he brake al order discipline of the church refusing the obedience vvhich by Christs ovvne precise ordinance vvas due vnto it the gouernors thereof so gaue free libertie by his ovvne craÌ„ple by vvriting arguing disputing to interpret the scripture as ech man listed vvithout regard to antiquitie vniuersalitie consent of al Christendom besides of al fathers Bishops auncient Councels vvhich example and behauiour vvas in general the cause and founteyne of al heresie Apostasie and Atheisme vvhich from such contempt self liking arrogancie must needs arise as vve see by experience but also in special the first origin and spring of this Berengarian
which shal be deliuered for yow is this An exposition much like to that vvhich Musculus mentioneth geuen by certain his bretherne in these vvords Corpus meum quod pro vobis dabitur in ordine rerum spiritualium est hoc c. my body which shal be geueÌ„ for yow in order of spiritual things is this to vvit a mysterie of spiritual foode this bread of life After this and certain other of like qualitie râ—hersed by Luther he addeth that besides those six vt septenarius numerus compleatur sunt qui dicunt non esse articulos fidei c. to fil vp the number of seuen other there are which say this is no article of faith and therefore men should not striue for it but euerie man be left to his owne opinion to iudge what he listeth These men treade vnder their feete and destroy al. And yet saith he the holy ghost is in euery one of these and none wil be reproued of his error in these so diuers contrarie expositions whereas the text can beare but one direct true sense So grossly the deuil moâ—keth vs. Hovvbeit al those diuersities and contrarieties obiected by Luther Zuinglius taketh for no absurdities but vvith great facilitie as he thinketh econcileth and iustifieth al as very good Euangelical specially that of Carolostadius vvhom the Sacramentaries acknovvledge for one of their first principal Doctors Zuingliê° vvords are Carolostadius that good and godly man doth expound the words of the supper as though Christ had directed them not to the bread but to him self Take eate for I must yeld vp this my body for yow And ansvvering some vvho obiected this diuersitie of opinions vvhich vvere amoÌ„g his felovves comparteners he vvriteth thus Apud nos de Eucharistia nihil vere est dissidij c. Amongst vs concerning the Eucharist truly there is no discord One thinketh there is an Apostrophe turning away of the word Hoc This. An other maketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of it that is thinketh that to be put in the first place which should be in the last Againe an other supposeth and auoucheth that a trope and figure is in the worde est is an other wil place the figure in the words body and blud Al which haue one meaning and their diuersitie ought not to offend any man As when captaines entend to ouerthrow some aduersarie fortresse they caÌ„ not be said to disagree albeyt one be of mynd to batter it with gunnes an other wold vndermyne it a third wold get it by scaling for they al agree in one that is to ouerthrow the fortresse By vvhich conclusion vve may learne one good and sure rule to vnderstand the true mynd and meaning of the Sacramentaries as they novv are commonly called or Caluinists or Zuinglians or BerengariaÌ„s for these vvords must I needs vse not only to expresse the difference betvvene them the Catholikes but also betvvene them the Protestants of Germanie commonly named Lutherans and vvho is rightly to be accounted of their side The rule is that any sectarie if he so vvrite or preach or beleeue in this matter that he gainsay the Catholike faith deny the real presence of Christ he is a true gospeller of the Sacramentarie side hath the right sense of their gospelling faith vvhich laboureth only or principally to abolish that former Catholike faith of Christs real presence in place thereof to establish a real absence And so vvriteth Musculus very expresly Omnes vt a me vel inter se in hac causa dissideant c Al men â—ith he how soeuer they disagree from me or among theÌ„ selues in this matter of the sacrament so they mainteyne not the Papistical impietie embrace them as my louing brethern in the lord The reason is for that they al be they Berengarians old or nevv or Petrobrusians or Albigenses or Anabaptists or Trinitarians they entend the ouerthrovv and destruction of the Catholike faith of Christs presence and labour to bring in the Zuinglian absence vvhich is the matter that these men principally desire And therefore so as they agree in this al other errors are venial and pardonable vvhat so euer they teach and hovv so euer they erre and if they may be said at al to erre yet at last they erre in the letter not in the spirite in a circumstance not in the substance as Zuinglius vvriteth in the place last quoted And in an other place vvhen Luther obiected to him that there were among his folovvers diuers sectes he ansvvereth It is starke false There are no sectes no diuisions amongest vs. VVe al both I and Oecolampadius and Carolostadius and the rest agree in this that there is in the sacrament only a figure and symbole Mary we shift the words of Christ diuers wayes as we can Asserimus symbola tantum esse sed verba diuersimode expedimus VVhereof him selfe yeldeth a number of examples vvorth the noting of vvhich many are gathered together out of diuers his books by loachimus VVestphalus a great gospeller but of an other stampe Out of the heape I vvil here recite 4. or 5. Thus are his vvords Zuinglius in his second treatise of the supper of the Lord saith that in these words This is my body the word body must be taken for the passion death which Christ susteyned in his body The like he hath in his answere to a frend touching the words of Christ The bread which I wil geue is my flesh Here saith Zuinglius by the word flesh is meant death as likewise when he saith This is my body which is delivered for vow by the word body he vnderstandeth his death passion How beit in an other treatise of the supper he saith the bread and flesh-which Christ here mentioneth is nothing els but faith And yet in an other booke he is of an other iudgement that the word flesh is to be taken for the deitie For saith Zuinglius Christ vsing the word flesh vnderstandeth the diuine nature which toke flesh so by a certain figure speaking of his mortal nature whereas he meaneth his nature immortal he vseth the word flesh but meaneth the spirite that is his diuinite which geueth life to the flesh In his epistle to Luther he taketh it for the memorie of Christ It is called the body saith he not for that this solemne meeting or the bread which then is broken is in deede Christs body but for that the memorie of his body death is then recorded In his second answere to Luthers Confession he taketh it for a thankesgeuing in these words The Sacrament is nothing els but a certaine diuine and very manerly holy assembly of the people and congregation of god when they meete together to the body of Christ that is to the Eucharist or thankesgeuing for Christs death which is therefore called Christs body
church as we learne by Theodore Beza VVhere there is no vse of bread wine or no store thereof as it chaunceth at some certain time there the Lords supper is orderly ministred if in steed of bread and wine that be taken which supplieth the place of bread wine ether by common vse or at such tymes And he obserueth rightly enough Christs meaning who not for nouelties sake taketh in steed of bread wine such things as haue though not equal yet like proportion or analogie of foode As in like mâ—â—ner if water be wanting yet the baptizing of some child may not wel be differred with edification I truly wold baptise with any other liquor as wel as with water By warrant whereof in many places of Christendom where bread wine is haâ—d to come by stockfish with single ale more coÌ„mon in vsual diet there the Protestant communion is wel orderly ministred if the minister with 3. or 4. brethern go together into a tauerne eate a litle stockfish drinke a draught of ale he bid them to remember the Lords death For whereas the words of Christs institution are no waves necessarie but al dependeth on the faith of the bretherne which communicate here we learne that bread wine are not so requisite but that other meate drinke may supply the want thereof whereas in this coÌ„munion which here I note is both the matter and also the forme of a Protestant supper who can deny but it is a veâ—â—e complete perfite coÌ„munion And that not only if a man vse stockfish but also by like reason any other meate that nourisheth though not in equal degree as bread doth yet in some like sort And then as any flesh â—apon pâ—g goose beef or mutton may serue for the one kind so match-beer strong or smale ale good water metheglin or any such vsed liquor may serue for the other So that we now draw somwhat nigh to the perfectioÌ„ esseÌ„t al forme of that which ouâ— gospellers cal the supper of the Lord which we see may be had at euery breakefast at euery dinner supper beuer where there is bread beere or cheese water oâ— flesh and wine or any such â— things which nourish our bodies as bread wine do though not in so large maner yet with this sober caution that the bretherne which meete at this coÌ„munion remember the death of Christ vse these other kinds of meate not for loue of â—â—eltie but for loue of Christian libertie hatred of Papistrie because forsooth they wil shew that they hate the Catholike church which vseth superstitiously as they suppose those only 2. elements But now let vs go one step farther put the case that 3. or 4. gossips meete together at a drinking and after much good how shold talke in sine they remember them selues then one willeth the other to remember the death of the Lord so drinke one to the other and eate some such gossiping meate as they haue brought some applepie or flawne or so forth whie is not this as true a Protestant coÌ„munion as any yet mentioned Here is the matter of the coÌ„munion that is some foode that nourisheth the body here is faith which is the forme here is remembrance of Christ and his death then what wanteth to make vp and perfite the coÌ„munion Truly I can not imagine any default touching the substance essence but that this is as ful complete a communioÌ„ as any at this day ministred in England or Scotland For that which perhaps some man may obiect to be here wanting vz. a minister is an obiection more â—it for a Papist or Catholike then a Protestant or heretike Among whom very few there are who haue written especially bookes of coÌ„mon places but they discourse at large wemen no lesse then men to be priests of the new testament although for maners sake they may not in al places vse practise such their priesthod I in paâ—t agree with them that euery woman is as â—it lawful a minister as any who ministreth in the Scottish and English congregations Certainly Luther hath made long treatises heapeth tegether a number of allegations out of the holy scriptures to proue al that are baptized wemen no lesse then men to be priests by vertue thereof to haue power both to preach minister sacraments In the second Tome of his works he particularly rehearseth al ecclesiastical functions proueth as wel as he can that the execution of them al is a like common to al that are baptized Among much other talke to that purpose thus he writeth The first office of a priest is to preach the word of this depend al the rest But this is coÌ„mon to al. Next is to baptize and this also may al do euen wemen when they baptize they execute a lawful priesthod an ecclesiastical ministerie which is proper to priests only The third is to consecrate bread wine But this also is commoÌ„â—o al no lesse then priests And this I aduouch by the authoritie of Christ him self saying do this in remembrance of me This Christ spake to al there present to come afterwards who so euer should eate that bread drink that wine Ergo what so euer was there bestowed was bestowed on al. Nether can the Papists oppose any thing against this besides their Fathers Councels custome This also is witnessed by S. Paule who 1. Cor. 11. repeating this applieth it to al the Corinthians making them al as him self was that is to say consecrators c. Forthwith after a few words he concludeth Igitur si quod maius est collatum est omnibus etiam mulieribus c. If then that which is greater be geuen indifferently to al men and women I meane the word and baptisme then that which is lesse I meane to consecrate the supper is geuen also to them VVhich argument as a most principal he vrgeth againe a few leaues after VVhen the office of teaching the word is graunted to any together therewith al that is vsed in the church is graunted I meane to baptise to consecrate to bynd to lose to pray to iudge For the office of preaching the gospel is the chief a very Apostolical office which geueth the foundation to al other offices which al are built thereon The like hath he in sundry places and bookes Only he requireth that whereas the right power thus to minister is coÌ„mon to al that are baptized wemen no lesse then men yet that nether men nor wemen vse this right of theirs but where there is want of better ministers then also that they do it with modestie To which purpose clearing of his assertion he maketh an obiection to himself in an other booke thus But the Papists obiect the saying of the Apostle Let wemen hold there peace
spiritually we may eate Christ in the supper as we may also at dinner or breakfast or walking or praying or hearing a sermon or when so euer we thinke on him beleeue that he truly dyed for vs yet no such eating is proper to the supper â—oâ— vve see it is coÌ„mon to al times and al places the supper vvas not instituted therefore but to ratifie confirme and seâ—le such spiritual eating and herein in this 〈…〉 consisteth truly the essence of Calâ—ins supper and not in eating the flesh of Christ and drinking his blud so much as spiritually For such a supper imparteth not vnto vs nether coÌ„municatâ—th the body of Christ nor is cause instrument or meane thereof othervvise then for that it stirreth vp ouâ—â—â—â—â— mynds and geueth vs occasion to beleeue in Christ by vvhich beleef only and no 〈…〉 Christ is eaten So that if by hearing a good sermon or reading a good chapter of the old testament or nevv or talking vvith a good zealous brother or sister a mans faith be better moued then by receiuing the supper to beleeue that Christ died rose again whereof many zealous Protestants much doubt to reforme their â—aith herein haue need of better helpes then is yelded to them by breaking of bread drinking of wine which thing may be very common and is very probably supposed then by such a sermon such a chapter such good brotherly talke Christs flesh is eaten more properly more truly more really and effectually then it is in the supper And therefore this is not the cause why the supper was instituted For so the word preaching serueth much better as Peter Martyr also conuinced by manifest reason and sequele of the Caluinian doctrine confesseth For being thus vrged I deny not saith he but this is our doctrine that the body of Christ is receiued no losse in words then in the sacrament or symboles For this receiuing is wrought by faith And to faith we are stirred vp by wordâ— aâ— wel as sacraments Neque vereor dicere multo etiam maâ—is c. And I feare not to affirme that wecome to the receiuing of Christs body much more by words then by sacraments For sacraments haue al their force from the words VVhich is most euideÌ„t to any Christian man indued with coÌ„mon capacitie To vvhom if one say these words that Christ dyed for our sâ—nnes rose againe for our iustification by whose death we al looke to be saued obteyne eternal felicitie and an other bring him in to the Protestant congregation and there breake before his eâ—es a loaf of bread and â—il a goblet of wine comparing these tvvo together there can be no question but the first vvords are ten rymes more avayleable to make the hâ—â—â—er eate Christ by faith then this later dumb ceremony vvhich may haue tvventie other significations as vvel as Christs passion death and resurrection and our iâ—stiâ—ication and doth not nor can signifie any such thing except some body tel him that such a signification is meant and intended thereby VVherefore the body of Christ being better receiued before supper by reading talking conferring vvith some honest zealous brother or before the taking of the bread by the preaching of the minister then by such symbolical receyuing of bread wine Christ being in that sort out of the supper both more coÌ„monly and ordinarily receiued as Caluin confesseth and euerie man may see then in the supper which chaunceth to many scarce once in the yere to some scarce once in 10. yere the receiuing also out of the supper by words being more effectual and profitable then in the supper by bread drinke as P. Martyr acknovvlegeth and by good reason iustifieth hereof Luthers obiection against this Caluinian supper albeit it vvere very rude and rustical yet lacked it not altogether ground that Christ had smale occasion to institute such a supper vvhereof al the Christian world is ful For there is neuer a Christian but ether doth or at least may make this supper euery hovvre of the day night also if he vvake and thinke vpon the passion and death of Christ VVhich obiectioÌ„ of Luther because it is though grosse and blunt yet sure euident therefore to auoyd that absurditie and that this supper of Carolostadius Zuinglius invention and framing but of Caluins polishing and persiting should not be altogether voyd of some vse this vvas deuised that it should serve for a seale to confirme the ministers preaching and the brethrens receiuing vvho ether before the supper or in the supper according as their mynd vvas thinking of Christ hauing eaten him by faith and cogitation spiritually aftervvards resorting together to their supper there receiue the seales of bread and vvine or some other nutriment to confirme assure them that before they haue receiued the Lords body spiritually by faith And this is the sealing and confirmation proper to the supper vvhereof in the places before noted P. Martir and Caluin vvrite and vvhich Caluin most accompteth of therefore geuing the definition of a Sacrament as it is common to the tvvo Baptisme and the Supper vvhich only he admitteth for sacraments maketh the very essence nature of them to consist in this sealing A Sacrament saith he is an external signe whereby the Lord sealeth to our consciences the promises of his beneuolence thereby to proppe vp our weake faith And this sealing and confirming is taught both by Caluin and al other right Caluinists as a most special substantial proprietie of their supper and the other sacrament of Baptisme also as that baptisme sealeth to vs remission of sinnes and election to life eternal the supper sealeth to vs the manducation of Christs body and blud which by faith we haue receiued For truly to speake after these mens doctrine the Supper yeldeth no more the one then baptisme doth the other the supper no more conferreth or imparteth Christs body then baptisme conferreth remission of sinnes and election to life eternal But saith Caluin aâ— in publike grauntes the seales which are set to the writings and instruments are of them selues nothing for if nothing were written the putting to of the seale were of no effect but when the writing is made graunted then the seales confirme make the same more autentical and as among the auncient Greekes Romanes their leagues and treaties of peace were confirmed by killing a sow which sow so killed had bene to no purpose had not the words couenants of the treatie bene accorded before for many a sow is killed which signifieth no such mysterie likewise in coÌ„mon contractes when matters haue bene by words of frendship agreement before concluded arrested on then is the contract ratified confirmed by shaking of hands without which antecedent words of concord the shaking of hands is nothing which may as wel be done by an enemie to euil purpose as
by a frend to good euen so fareth it in the sacraments of baptisme and the supper which are seales to ratifie coÌ„firme spiritual things but not to geue or confer them as hath bene said before So then now we are come so far of from our first diuine opinion of the Sacrament that no maner coÌ„munication of Christs flesh is properly attributed vnto it no more then the graunt of a Lordship by the prince to his subiect is to be attributed to the seale of wax the articles of peace betwene the Romans their enemies to the sow or hog the private coÌ„tracts betwene men in buying selling borowing c. is ascribed to the snaking of haÌ„ds which only succedeth in co 〈…〉 mation of bargains promised as the sacrameÌ„t of the supper succedeth for a scale cotirmation of the body of Christ which the Protestat hauing eaten before â—or a pledge â—atification thereof aftervvards cateth dâ—â—keth this symbolical bread vvine ¶ But yet Caluin slaieth not here nether can hevey vvel For besides some other absurdities against this sâ—aling inuented by him vvithout any vvariant or probable prâ—tâ— vt of scripture as shal be shevved here after this â—â— one sound argument to breake al these seales for that they thus vâ—ed are very lyâ—â—g and countersent seales and therefore not to be thought in any case to proceed from god but rather from his enemie the deuil For seing as Caluin testifieth sure it is that many vvhich come to the Lords tables haue no participation of the flesh and blud of Christ they â—eede not on lam spiritually but remaine his enemies and receiue that bread and vvine to their condemnation and yet this notvvithstanding the minister geueth indifferently to al these seales vvhich confirme assure to them al that they haue receiued Christ maruelous effectually hovv caâ—t be auoyded but the minister lyeth dovvne â—ight vvhen in fact he thus informeth the communicants as also he plaieth the traytour against god in that he putteth his scale to a blaÌ„ke where in god neuer vvrote ought that is to say he testifieth by deliuering this symbolical or scaling bread and vvine that god highly fauoureth and loueth such a protestant vvhom yet in veritie god hateth and purposeth eternally to damne Nether doth Caluin nether can he by any probable colour auoid this absurditie Only somvvhat to mend the matter to proppe vp his poore Supper that it be not altogether void and ridiculous he continually runneth on â—atther and saither and at lenght alloweth it for his final conclusion to be a memorial or commemo ratiue signe to recal to our memories the death of Christ mary yet vvith this sober caueat that vve suppose in no vvise there is in it any vertue or grace of sanctification but only a bare memorial as it vvere a picture or image rudely fashioned to helpe our vveake memories and put vs in remembraÌ„ce of Christ Both these parts I vvil ioyne together for brenities sake and for that Caluin also teacheth them both together in very precise and plane termes â—nocerning the one part that it is void of al vertue VVe must beware saith he that we fal not in to error by reason of such speaches as the faâ—hers sometimes vse conteyning more honorable traise and commendation of the sacrameÌ„ts then needeth as though there we eany hid vertue 〈◊〉 or ioâ—ned to the sacraments as wine is offered to vs in a â—oblet For sacraments are the same thing to vs from god as messengers that bring good newes are from men or els we may wel liken them to an earnest penny in confirming a bargain for that the of them selues geue no maner grace but they declare and shew and confirme such things as by gods bâ—untisulnes are ceuen vâ— Againe in the litle booke which he made conteyning the consent of doctrine betwene his Geneuian church the Tigurine of Zuinglius forndation thus is their consent expressed touching the sacrament Si quid boni nobis per sacramenta confertur c. If aâ— good be bessowed on vs by the sacraments that is not wrought by the proper vertue of the sacraments no not if ye ioyne to them the promise of god with which they are adorned For it is only god that worketh by his spirite And albeit he vse the seruice of sacraments yet thereby he nether powreth his grace in to them nor withdraweth any thing from the force of his spirite but for our rude and grosse capacitie so vseth thee helpes that yet al vertue of action or operation remayneth in him self alone As for the signes saith Beza after Caluin there is in them no other force or uertue but so far forth aâ— by those external obiects of bread and wine our internal senses are moued In which words both the master and the cholâ—r both Caluin Beza the church of Geneua as also Zurick remoue al maner vertue of grace and sanctification from the sacraments and make them mere signes and as it were painted tables to bring vs being othervvise forgetful â—ude and grosse to remembrance sometimes of Christ which is the second part and clearly set downe by Caluin who writing vpon S. Paule and declaring what is the force of the Eucharist maketh it to consist nether in deliuering vs the body blud of Christ present with the signe nor yet in deriuing to vs some real vertue from that diuine body remayning in one only place nor in spiritual imparting the body or vertue of it nor in sealing that which was receaued before nor any matter hetherto treated of but only in that it serueth as a picture or image to put vs in remembrance of Christ so that if we were of good memorie to remember Christs death vvithout this breaking of bread and drinking of vvine in the supper by his iudgement the Supper might be spared wel mough Vpon Christs words Do this in remembrance of me thus he argueth Ergo caena 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est c. Therefore the supper is a token or memorial appointed to helpe our infirmitie For if otherwise we were myndful inough of Christ death this helpe were superfluous And this is common to al sacraments for they are helpes of our infirmitie VVhich vvords withdravv from the Supper al maner grace and vertue and leaue it a naked and bare signe ordeyned only to helpe vveake memories and as Zuinglius defineth it to be nothing els but a commemoration thinkes geuing for the Lords death And so saith he the old writers called it the body and blud of Christ when as in the meane season they meant it to be no other thing then a signe or figure which renewed the memory of Christs body deliuered for vs as if some good wife receiuing a ring of her husband when he goeth out of the towne should cal that ring her husband For vvhich cause he vseth to cal the sacrameÌ„t symbolical bread
of the crosse and blotted out the offences of the world finally the same thing to be receiued outwardly with our mouth which inwardly we beleeue in hart id ore sumitur quod â—ide creditur do not these speeches declare that the body and blud of Christ is offered to the mouth of Christians Or when Christ bad his disciples to take and eate that body in the chalice to drinke that blud of the new testament meant he that they should eate and drinke only by faith Do his words import not that they should eate with their mouth but only vvith their eyes and eares which only two instruments M. B. allovveth for eating Christs body by faith the eare serving for conueyance of the audible word preached to our sovvle the eye for conveyance of the visible word that is the bread vvhen it is broken in their Communion by vvhich tvvo meanes only we eate Christ spiritually by faith as he teacheth vs If he thus say yet S. Marke wil somwhat gainsay him and if he haue any conscience make him gainsay him self reuoke his saying For that as Christ deliuered thâ—m his chalice and bad them drinke it so S. Marke testifieth that they al dranke of it vvhich drinking could no more be done vvithout their mouth vvith their only eyes and â—ares then with their heeles And therefore in the bible vve find that Christs blud both in the word in the sacrament is offered to the mouth of Christians And therefore to ioyne â—un on vvith M. B. a litle vvhereas he denieth that there is in the Bible any receiuing of Christ but by faith vvhereas he biddes vs find that in any part of the bible he is then content to turne Christ ouer to vs vve accept his offer And if he can so interprete these places of the Euangelists vvhose vvritings are part of the Bible that lie dravv them al â—o a mere spiritual eating by only faith vvithout corporal and real communion as the church teacheth I vvil confesse he hath as good a grace in interpreting scripture as euer had Carolostadi the first sounâ—â—yne of this sacramentarie heresie yea or the heauenly prophete vvhether it vvere the deuil or the deuils dame â—s Luther saith that instructed him ¶ And yet that I make not my self to sure of my vvinâ—ing before hand I must needs acknovvlege that M. B. already geueth a sâ—â—ewd presumptioÌ„ that he vvil vvring Christs words after a very straunge fashion before he yield so much as any reasonable man pressed with these â—ords must graunt necessarilie and perforce For besides that he is of one spirite vvith them that haue already geven vs vvonderful constructions of these fevv vvords This is my body vvhich body Christ vvilled his disciples to receiue and eaâ—e as that by it according to 〈◊〉 Christ meant his passion and death or els he meant faith or his deitie or a memorie or at lest a thankes geuing or lâ—st of al the churchâ— or if al this serue not he meant thereby an action as Ioannes a Lasco rather thinâ—â—eth and then the sense must needs be spiritual for â—â—oubtles vve can not take and eate nether Christs passion and dâ—â—â—h nor faith nor yet his deitie nor a memorie noâ— a thankesgeuing nor the church vvhether Zuingli meane 〈◊〉 vvals and stones of the church or the people noâ— aâ— action but after a mere spiritual or rather spiritish maâ—â—â— besides thâ—â—e I say of al vvhich he may choose any one vvhich he pleaseth with as good â—ight as they did he geueth an other of him self as vvonderful as any of al these For saith he we find in Christs institution a promise and a commaund The commaund is this Take eate which obligeth vs to obey craues obedience The promise is conteyned in these words This is my body The promise craues faith and beleefe as the commaund craues obedience VVhich exposition seemeth to me as straunge as any of the precedent as straunge it is to cal these vvords of Christ a promise as to cal it a promise if one say to a poore man Take receiue here is a pennâ— or a peece of bread if this be a promise I vvonder hovv we shal define the performance But let it stand for good for these men haue power to make al things sound as they list especially in church matters articles of â—aith with which the Eldership or as the phrase is in the Scottish coÌ„munion booke the Assembly of the ministers Elders and deacons may dispense varie and alter at their good pleasure But what shal become now of these words what sense shal vve geue them forsooth this Take eate a promise or take eate here is a promise which is delivered for yow And if he thus meane then in deed he is far from any corporal eating And if he meane otherwise as Caluin doth vvhom perhaps he foloweth for he vttering no more theÌ„ I haue set dovvne leaueth me in doubt I can but gheasse his true meaning that the vvords of Christ are a promise annexed to a condition and so not fulfilled except the condition be accomplished vvhich goeth before as Caluin teacheth even so his meaning is as straunge wil dravv after it as straunge and vvonderful a communion For saith Caluin these words Take eate is a coÌ„maundement This is my body is a promise like as the lord commaunded Cal on me and immediatly adioyneth the promise I wil heare thee If now any man would bost of this promise That God vvil heare him and not performe the commaundement annexed To cal vpon god might be not be counted a mad soole Euen so here this promise This is my body is made and geuen to them who obserue that which Christ commaunded Out of which this we may and must directly gather that if This is my body be a promise depending of that condition and commaunde Take eate which goeth before then when soeuer man on his part fulfilleth the condition commaunde God on the other side questionles performeth that he hath promised And it were blasphemous impietie to thinke or say otherwise that men doing as God appointed God faileth in performing that vvhich he promised This therefore being a most sure vnremoveable ground if these vvords This is my body be a promise depending vpon that commaund Take eate then by like assured consequence and conclusion when so euer Christian men take and eate especially if they doe it in remembrance of Christ vvhich albeit it be not in the commaund Caluin requireth it not yet I am content to adde it for more suertie then such bread to such eaters is the body of Christ and so vvhen soeuer Christian men vvith such remembrance eate they eate Christs body vvhen soeuer they drinke they drinke his blud For like as he is a mad foole in Caluins iudgement vvho thinketh he can enioye the promise of Christs body except he
sacraments And then must it needs folow that the sacraments may be ministred to those only which are able to heare the word whereby infants are secluded from baptismâ— And in deed this is one of the strongest arguments that the Anabaptists haue This for al Christians to come so that hence forward by M. B. Theologie baptisme must no more be ministred to children or infants but we must expect with the Anabaptists vntil they come to yeres of discretion that then they hearing the minister preach may haue the right sacrament endued with life and sowle and perfite essence which now for want of such preaching is to them mere water without the spirite a dead body without life or sowle and as our Puritanes speake iust according to Caluin M. B. nothing but seales without writing and plain blanks After foloweth an authoritie of Zuinglius to prove his purpose which because it is very long would fil vp a leaf at lest I willingly omit The summe of Zuinglius allegation and my L. application is that the word preached is not the life and perfection of the sacrament but that the sacraments are perfite without it and that M. B. and al other in teaching this doctrine plainly ioyne hands with the Anabaptists Thus my Lord of Canterbury Vnto whose reasons one more I wil adde which M. B. his preaching before and the general doctrine of the sacramentaries yeldeth against this toy or rather madnes It is agreed among them very generally that the baptisme of S. Iohn was the self same that Christ his Apostles after deliuered to the church we now enioy VVhich being so then must it needs folovv that it had the same matter forme the same elemeÌ„t word that ours hath This is evident can not be denyed Let vs then proceed because of the matter element which was water in both there is no controversie let vs consider the forme that is the life and sovvle the word preached without vvhich baptisme is nothing but water as their other signe of the supper conteyneth nothing but coÌ„mon bread VVhen S. Iohn ministred baptisme to Christ did he preach the word as here vve haue it defined did he with a cleere voyce denounce and proclame to Christ al the parts of baptisme Did he tel Christ vvhat was his owne part and dutie as likevvise what was Christs part dutie How Christ ought to come receiue the baptisme and so furth as here vve haue the vvord defined and explicated Let M. B. make choise of vvhich part he vvil and answere yea or no I suppose he shal perceiue his ovvne error and foly and that as in ansvvering truly he must deny al his preaching hetherto about this VVord so if he vvil stand to maynteine his vvord and say that S. Iohn vsed in his sacrament such a word such preaching and opening al parts of the sacrament this affirmation in the iudgement of sober men wil conuince him not so much of folie as furie not of heresie as of phrenesie the particular consideration vvhereof I leaue to him selfe ¶ Novv let vs a vvhile sequester al authoritie both of god and man of scripture and father old or nevv saving M. B. him self and examine this matter by it self according to indifferent trial M. B. his ovvne preaching If vve marke vvel vvhat vvord it is that he requireth to geue life to the sacrament vve shal find it to be such a word as proueth the tenth part of English and Scottish baptismes and communions to be no sacraments at al. For first vvhereas in very many churches of England and I thinke the like of Scotland baptismes and communions are ministred vvithout Sermons in many some poore homilie is read in steed of a Sermon in al these churches the sacraments are dead things the communion bread is nought els but common bread the vvater of baptisme is coÌ„mon prophane vvater nether of these any sacrament And that the reader thinke not my asseveratioÌ„ bold or straunge vvhere I say that in England in many churches are so fevv Sermons let him vnderstand that albeit there be in deed order prescribed that in euery parish church there should be 4. sermoÌ„s in the yere euery quarter one vvhereas in the yere there are baptismes and communions perhaps 2. or 3. hundred yet this is soil obserued that notvvithstanding such order takeÌ„ the CaÌ„bridge doctors them selues testifie that they know parishes not far from Cambridge so principal an Vniuersitie for preachers where one of these sermons was not in 4. yeres together which if it be so so nere to Cambridge say they what is to be thought of other places of the realme And els where the same parties affirme that in most churches of England there is none that ether can or wil preach so that this one clause maketh voyde thousands of baptismes and thousands of Communions in England and Scotland For this must be obserued by the vvay that such reading of Homilies in the church is not according to this definition not these mens opinion preaching of the word with a cleere voyce no more say they then a mens pen or hand is his tongue and voyce vvho furthermore vtterly deny such reading to be comprised in the name of preaching despise it altogether and say that it is as il as playing on a stage and worse to Next to omit Homilies come to sermons whereas this vvord is appointed by Caluin to be preached after one certaine forme vz that the minister preach the promise and leade the people thether where the signe directeth how many thousand ministers faile in preaching this promise who doubtles in al the Gospels where after the Protestant-Theologie mention is made of the sacrament can not possibly find any such promise as Caluin surmiseth for that assuredly there is none such For to tel vs that these vvords This is my body is a promise is as blunt ridiculons a toy as if a man would make the articles of our Creed promises as if some vvise minister would tel vs that these verities Christ was borne of the virgin he suffred death vnder Pilate be rose againe and ascended vvere promises which are of like qualitie with that promise of Iohn Caluin And if in Christs words vvhere he instituteth this sacrameÌ„t there be no promise hovv then shal the minister preach with a lowd cleer voyce vpoÌ„ this promise which is not If to helpe forward the matter we shal take M. B. his expositioÌ„ that the minister must tel the people whereto the signe tendeth and directeth them that is looke how able the bread is to nurish them corporally so able is Christ to nurish them spiritually to eternal life which spiritual nurriture is sealed coÌ„firmed in them by these reuerend sealeâ— of bread vvine first this similitude is taken not from the scripture but from the doctors fâ—thers and therefore a
Minister is iniuried and it is against his profession out of the pulpit vvhence the only vvord of the Lord should sound to preach such inventions of men Next vvho can doubt but thus to prescribe one certain rule as necessarily to be obserued is the right vvay quit to disanul as many mo thousandâ— of their baptismes communions For vvho can imagin that the vnruly ministers folovv any one certain rule Or vvho knovveth not that it is in a maner against their professioÌ„ to admit any such vnâ—â—â—iâ—ie And yet this very order intended I suppose by Caluin and exactly and particularly thus defined by M. B. is most essential For seing the bread and vvine are material pâ—â—â—s and by their condition apt to signifie in general a hundred things as hath bene declared whereas the determination and reducing of it from general to special from signifying things prophane to signifie things sacred among a number of things sacred one several singular vz. the eating of Christs flesh by faith dependeth vpon the vvord of the minister thus determining it assuredly this vvord bringing vvith it this determination and so separating and abstracting the bread from al other things is most necessary most essential For as a peece of wax vvhich is to receiue the kings seale or image is indifferent before the staÌ„pe to receiue the image of a serpent of a dog of a tree of any living creature man or beast but after by the staÌ„p is limited to one certain forme and representation even so the bread being the matter and as it vvere the vvax which is to be sealed is of it self indifferent to as many stampes images But vvhen the minister cometh and according to M. B. and Caluins direction telleth them that as the bread feedeth their body to life temporal so the flesh of Christ feedeth both body and sovvleto life eternal c. â—ow this word putteth a certain print a certain image a certain stamp signe on the bread vvhereby it receiveth this one sacramental significatioÌ„ This is it vvhich putteth life in to the dead element and this vvord is the life and sovvle of the communion VVhich being so thereof I conclude plainly directly that thorough out al Scotland and England are very fevv true communions very fevv sacraments of Christs body For if there be a Sermon made not an homilie read yea if the sermon entreate of the sacrament and not of other matters yet if the minister preach not as here M. B. and Calvin appoint ether for frowardnes because he wil not be commaunded or els of very conscience because he is no Calvinist but a mere Zuinglian vvho defineth the sacrameÌ„t to be nothing but a badge a token a memorial and that it hath no such vertue of sealing and confirming vvhich the Zuinglian condemneth as Anabaptistical this sermoÌ„ is not the vvord vvhich geueth life to the sacrament but leaveth it as blockish dul and dead an element as it was before Because although the minister vnto this wax of bread and vvine put a seale a staÌ„p a signification yet he putteth not the right seale the right stamp the right signification although he preach the vvord yet he preacheth not that word vvhich should quicken and geue life to this action he preacheth not that word vnto which this seale is to be appended for confirmation Much more may I conclude that al English ministers if they be not Puritanes but folow their Archbisshop my lord of Canterbury vvho condemneth for Anabaptistical no lesse then Zuinglius though for an other reason this opinioÌ„ of geving life to the sacraments by preaching the vvord â—l they can never possibly haue any right communion any right sacrament they can haue nothing but commoÌ„ bread but a dead element because they admit not but contrariwise o great sacrilege impugne that vvhich is the very sowle and should geue life to the sacramet n I conclude thirdly that if a Scottish perfit Calvinian minister make the sermon except he humble him self to preach not only this former word of the promise inveÌ„ted by Calvin found no vvhere in the Gospels nor only the word of the mystical similitude betvvene the bread and Christs body required by M. B. borowed out of the doctors but also besides with a cleer voyce preach distinctly open al the parts of the sacrameÌ„t which thing here M. B. in general requireth in special reherseth explicareth nether is such a CoÌ„munioÌ„ the right sacrament to the essence coÌ„plement vvhereof it is necessarie not that one or two or a fevv but that al parts of the sacrament and sacrameÌ„tal receiving be opened declared vz. 1. that a lawful minister 2. vvith a cleere voyce 3. in a familiar homely language 4. publikely proclame and denounce 5. the bâ—il parts of the Supper or CoÌ„munioÌ„ 6. what is the peoples part 7. what is his owne part 8. how he ought to deliuer that bread and wine 9. how the people ought to receive it 10. how they ought to receiue the body and blud of Christ signified by it 11. how they should come with great reverence to the table Besides al vvhich he must also speake 12. what soever Christ spake in that whole action of his supper without omitting any one iote Al this is comprised in the name of the VVord al this must be preached by the minister before it can be a sacrameÌ„tal signe or supper and omitting any of these quite marreth and destroyeth the vvhole supper as where many parts are required to the nature and substance or essence of some certain body or creature the missing of any one destroyeth the whole as in man or beast the losse of any one essential part as hart lungs c. bringeth certain death to al. So then if the minister do not in particular prosecute ech one of these parts in his sermon if he folovv not precisely and religiously this M. B. his appointment if he play the Minister and sting out in to other matter against Pope and Catholike church and perhaps inveigh against this formal prescription of M. B. for that the spirite of the Lord in them is not to be bridled by men that they know their dutie herein and how the sacrament is to be ministred as vvel as Iohn Caluin Iohn Knox or M. B. him self that they wil stand in defence of their libertie not become servants of men c. if he thus preach or in any other sort so that he omit any part of that word vvhich is before declared the bread and vvine distributed to the people after that kind of preaching is not a sacrament but stil remayneth common bread not worth a straa for want of the right perfit word And so there was never a communion ministred according to the Scottish communion booke since these ministers got rule in Scotland which had ought
blud of the death of Christ If he looke vpon a picture of Christ not reverently vvhich as hath bene proved offereth Christ spiritually to the sowle better then any bread and vvine ministred at the best communion vvhere soever they breake theyr bread most bissilie if vvith the external sight of the picture he internally receive not Christ is he giltie of so great sacrilege as these vvords import â— doubtles not For so should vve multiplie sinnes and make men to commit sacrileges almost in every thing they do for that every creature as hath bene shewed is as nighly ioyned to Christs body as is their signes and seales of bread and vvine and represent Christ as perfitly and offer him to the faith mind and remembrance of every Christian as presently And albeit oftentymes Christian mâ—n in deed offend in not taking and vsing such occasions to remember Christ and so by faith to eate Christ as God offereth them yet such omission negligence is not to be condemned as sacrilege against Christs body and blud vvhich here is spoken of The self same may be conceived of a number of like examples If the minister ready to baptize a child and perceiving his hands sowle take a handful of vvater out of the font and first vvash his hands albeit he playeth a sluttish part and offendeth yet no vvise man vvil say he is gilty of Christs body and blud no more then he is gilty of the kings body and blud vvho to vse M. B. his example having the kings image and seale in wax by him and vvanting vvax to scale his owne letter breaketh the kings seale and applieth it to his owne vse These similitudes are of like condition qualitie therefore whereas for not discerning the body and blud of Christ in the sacrament a man is condemned as gilty of Christs body and he is not so in any of these matters hereof it is plainly inferred that Christs body is otherwise in the sacrament vvhereof S. Paule speaketh then in any of the rest ¶ The other argument vvhich M. B. alloweth to the Catholike is this The bread which the wicked eate is not naked bread bâ—â— the sacrament The sacrament hath ever coinoyned with it the thing signified Therefore the thing signified is geuen to al. To this argument M. B. pretendeth a double answere but geveth a single and the sâ—me very single and simple â—â— deed VVhat saith he if I graunt them al this argument there should no inconvenience folow For the thing signified â—ay be geven to al that is offered to al and yet not received of al. A man vvould thinke that when he thus beginneth vvith what if this vvere but a florish before hand being in deed al his answere vz that the wicked get the body and blud of Christ offered to them conioyntly with the word and sacraments but wanting faith they receive the bread but not the body This is the argument and this is his answere And although the argument be not very strong yet by the vveaknes of his answere it is much bettered For if the entier sacrament consist of not bread alone but bread vvith the body that is the thing signified how can it be truly said that the vvicked receive the vvhole entier sacrament vvho receive the one only more base and corruptible part For vvhereas M. B. maketh his foolish and childish evasion in saying To the vvicked is geuen that is to say is offered this is to play the boy in matters most grave and serious The sacrament is geven and received not offered only The sacrament consisteth of two parts bread the thing signified The bread alone is not the sacrament no more then a body alone is a man vvalles alone are a howse paper is a booke cloth is a gowne or vvheat is a loaf of bread VVherefore vvho so receiveth bread alone receiveth the sacrament no more then he hath a howse vvho hath the only vvalles vvithout ether foundatioÌ„ or roose then he hath a gowne vvho hath only a peece of cloth as it came from the draper vvithout stitch or cut So that the argument as M. B. maketh it standeth stil in force notwithstanding that childish sophistrie yea notvvithstanding ought that he can say against it by the rules of his Theologie And thus much Pet. Martyr frankly graunteth VVhereas saith he there are two parts of the sacrament the signe and the thing signified if a men wil speake of these matters exactly he must say that the wicked receive not the whole sacrameÌ„t but one only part that is the bread And a litle after The wicked in the holy supper receive nothing els but bread wine and consequently they receive not the sacrament nor any sacrament at al. ¶ VVhich albeit it be the general doctrine of the Calvinists for the Lutherans are contrary to them in this no lesse then are the Catholiks yet somwhat other to helpe this poore beggerly bread of theirs or to shew the vanitie and inconstancie of their doctrine I vvel briefly by their owne Theologie prove that the evil Protestants except they be plaine Apostataes and Atheists as many are receive not only the bread but also the thing signified as vvel as M. B. him self and therefore that al his talke against S. Paules vvords is mere sâ—ivolous cavilling vvithout any ground of learning not only Catholike but also Scottish or Genevical For vvhat is there that baâ—â—eth a common Protestant though in life he be never so bad and impure from receiving by faith the body of Christ as vvel as the minister He eateth the bread as vvel as the minister there is the body of the sacrament The life and sowle is put in to it by the ministers sermon as before vve are taught Now vvhen that evil Protestant after the sermon receiveth it vvhy receiueth he not their perfit ful and entier signe vvhereas he receiveth that vvhich hath both matter forme both body and sowle If M. B. reply that he lacketh faith vvhich is most necessarie I answere first that his faith is altogether impertinent to this purpose for that the sacrament hath before his total nature and complement vvhich can not be taken away by his faith vvhich as being very good maketh not the sacrament not is required as essential thereto so nether being very baâ— can it marre the sacrament from vvhose essential perfection it vvithdraweth nothing I say further that such a Calvinist be he vvicked in the highest degree so that he be not an Apostata hath faith good inough to receive besides the bread the thing signified that is Christs body For how is that receiued eaten by faith In vvhat sort thus that as his eye seeth the bread broken so his mind remembreth Christs death and passion And vvhat hinderance I pray yow is evil life to this imagination Can not this remembrance stand vvith evil life Can not he if
est Christianum hominem non esse qui non eadem fidei certitudine credit Dominum Iesum esse filium Dei se per eum esse percepturum vitam aeternam VVe professe â—aith Bucer Brentius Georgius Maior vvith other Lutheran Divines disputers against the Catholikes in that conference that he is not to be taken for a Christian man who beleeveth not with the same certitude or assurance of faith both that Christ our lord is the sonne of God and that him self in particular by Christ shal possesse life eternal This is that vvhich M. B. meaneth vvhen he saith that the applying of Christ eating of Christ by faith is to beleeue that he hath shed his blud for me that he hath purchased remission of sinnes to me VVhich iustification and remission of sinnes being in particular beleeved of the Protestant in such sort as is any article of his â—aith thereby geveth a spiritual manducation to him vvhich the Catholike hath not Thus writeth M. B. afterwardes vvhere he spendeth many pages in magnifying this â—aith This faith â—aith he workes a wonderful assurance and persuasion that God loves me that he wil saue me that meâ—â—â— life saluation at perteynes to me This works the seeling of mercy in our hart a particular application whereby we claime Christ and God as proper to vs as if no man bâ—â— title to him and his promises but we Again This particular application is 〈…〉 difference the chief marke and note whereby our â—â—ith who are iustified in the blud of Christ is discerned 〈…〉 faith of the Papists c. For the Papist 〈…〉 promise of mercy to his ownesowle He countes it preâ—â—â—tion as in truth it is and for presumption counted and coâ—demned by the Apostle Rom. 11. 20. 21. â—â— Corint 9. â—7 Philip. 3. 11. 12. Hebr. 4. 1. 2. c. to say I am an elect I â—â— saueâ— iustified This is the vvonderful faith of the Protestants vvhich to them is al in al. This M. B. calleth their iustifying faith By this thy eate Christ so as no man doth 〈…〉 theâ—â— By this they are sure of heaven in heaueÌ„ to be felowes equal vvith S. Peter S. Paule yea vvith the blessed virgin mother of God For so Luther foundeâ— and first inventor of this faith writeth expressely Quâ—â— hac side renati sumus pares sumus in dignitate honore D. Paulo Petro S. Deiparae virgini ac divis omnibus VVâ—â— now that at last vvâ— know exactly vvhat faith it is vvhich geveth the Protestants so deep holdfast in their spiritual maÌ„â—ucatioÌ„ let vs retouâ—â—â— to our principal purpose And as by this vvhich hath bene said of this special Protestant faith I confesse M. B. hath a sufficient ground to chalenge such kind of eating by this faith I meane to him self and his companions Protestants and to exclude out al Catholikes be they as holy as S. Peâ—er or S. Paule vvho never had such a special faith and therefore could never thus â—aâ—e Christ so yet the blocke lyeth stil in M. B. vvay and the rest of his consâ—aternitie that by this saith evil Protestants receive Christ no lesse then good For among the Protestants the most detestable and most blasphemous heretikes have this assurance of their iustification and remission of sinnes no lesse then M. B. or Iohn Calvin or Luther him self vvho by the helpe of an old man whose name Luther expresseth not saith M. Fox but belike it vvas the same man vvho in an other forme frequeÌ„ted Carolostadâ—ê° instructed him first of al inveÌ„ted this special iustifying faith For as after Luther al Lutherans have it most assuredly and after Zuinglius al Zuinglians and after Calâ—in al Calvinists so the Anabaptists more then any of those former sects and Libertines Familie of love by vvord and deed by life and death most confidently chalenge to them selves this assurance that they in Christ have remission of their sinnes that Christ died for them that he shed his blud for them that they are spiritually vnited to Christ they are inwardly so fed by him and outwardly so clothed vvith him that as it is testified by sundry stories many such Protestants both men vvemen and maydens long sithence in Bohemia and of late in Holland at none dayes in the sight of thousands vvould vvalke naked thorough the streetes preaching the vvord of the Lord and could not be vvithdrawen from that furious vnnatural madnes by the terror of present death continually even to death and in death some crying Praise the Lord others Open your eyes ye blind Papists others Revenge O Lord the blud of thy servants and thus not by vvords as M. B. doth but by deeds and facts by patient suffering of death approved they their confidence and assurance of such special faith as M. B. teacheth and Luther the Calvinists describe If then the Anabaptists to make stay and exeÌ„plifie this matter by them vvhom Calvin condemneth for heretikes and vvhose martyrs though in shew marvelous holy and in number never so many he accounteth and calleth martyres diaboli the devils martyrs by vvhich name likewise the Lutherans cal the martyrs of Calvins sect have this sure faith that Christ dyed for them in special and that Christ shed his blud for them in particular and they in this sort spiritually eate Christ how vvith vvhat prohabilitie can M. B. deny such eating to al Protestants of his owne sect though evil livers vvho much more certainly have this faith and therefore much more spiritually eate Christ If an heretike can have a constant persuasion in the death of Christ and then al goes wel and he therefore truly receives Christ by faith according to M. B. definition how much more may a vvicked Calvinist vvhom M. B. accounteth no heretike reteyne this constant persuasion Hath an Anabaptist a â—â—â—th of the sowle apt for such receiving hath not a Calvinist Is evil life a greater bar to such receiving then naughty faith vvhereas this receiving is vvrought only by faith not by life And vvhat need I to rest exemplifie this by Libertines or Anabaptists vvhereas the best surest ground to refute M. B. in this point is the general doctrine of Calvin and Calvinists and the same preached at large by M. B. him self in these Sermons For as M. B. is sure that he is iustified he is elect he is saved he hath this special faith vvhich applieth Christ to him so properly and peculiarly as though no man had interest in Christ but him self alone so this faith vvhich is the right perfit iustifying faith and proper to the elect being once obteyned is never after lost nor never can possibly depart from them commit thy sinnes never so greavous and horible Thus teacheth Beza in the Confession of his Christian Geneva faith most plainly This Calvin in his Institutions
Paule and cited by M. B. is examined and by it is cleerly proved that the Protestant faith which they cal so is no faith such as S. Paule meaneth but mere fansie and imagination Christ in this world did esteeme of carnal cognation which M. B. wickedly denieth His wicked corruption of Christs words that Christs flesh is vnprofitable is directly against Christs owne preaching and our faith of the incarnation He in taking from the body al real coniunction with Christ infinuateth a denyal of the resurrection of the body as Luther and the Lutherans prove plainly against the Calvinists M. B. his obiection taken out of the Gospel that corporal tuitching of Christ is vnprofitable VVhy Christ required faith what maner of faith in them whom he cured from diseases The place of scripture which M. B. obiecteth as likewise many other proveth the cleane contrarie of thâ—t for which be pretendeth it vz that corporal tuitching was a â—â—re immediat cause of health then tuitching by only faith May had benefite of Christ by only corporal tuitching of hiâ— much more by both corporal also spiritual receiving him in the B. Sacrament CHAP. 16. HEnce forward the principal argument concerning the sacrameÌ„t newly entreated of for here is much tedious repetition of old things of the vvord sacrament vvhat word is necessarily required to make the sacrament the doctrine of seales and confirmation of mens right and title by seales c. vvhich being already drawen in to their several places and answered before I vvil therefore omit here coÌ„sisteth ether in refelling the Catholike doctrine tâ—â—ching Christs real presence or in confirming a vulgar opinion that Christ is eaten by faith vvherein he bestoweth many vvords vvhich of them selves are not amisse but that they are applied to an evil end as that the spirit of God vniteth Christians to Christ that Christ is conioyned to vs with a spiritual band that this is wrought by the power and vertue of the holy spirite as the Apostle saith 1. Cor 12. 13. that al faithful men and women are baptized in â—ne body of Christ that is are conioyned and fastned with Christ by the moyen of one spirite c. that faith is a spiritual thing that it is the gift of God powred downe in to the â—â—â— of men and women wrought in the sowle of every one and â—â—â— by the mighty operation of the holy spirite that we â—â—â— Christ spiritually by remembring his bitter death and pa 〈…〉 c. These and a number such other sentences in which he spendeth many pages of this sermon are in them selves good true Christian and Catholike But vvhen â—e applieth al this coniunction of the spirite to exclude the coniunction vvhich is wrought by Gods spirite to but yet not only spiritually but also corporally vvhen he acknowlegeth no other receiuing of Christ in the sacrament then that vvhich is vvrought as vvel vvithout the sacrament vvhen soever vve remember his death and passion vvhen he so advaunceth this manducation by faith as though there vvere not only no manducation so profitable but also besides that no true manducation of Christs body at al in this he plaieth the sophister in vndermining one veritie by commending an other he plaieth the part of a craftie enemie vvho sheweth bread in the one hand and vvhile we behold that striketh vs on the head with a stone which he holdeth in the other in one vvord he plaieth the very heretike vvho ether thinketh him self or would his audience to thinke that one part of Catholike faith gaynsaith an other that the spirite of God vniting Christians vvith Christ their head spiritually excludeth al corporal participatioÌ„ which most of al confirmeth increaseth that spiritual coÌ„iunction that spiritual eating by faith or remembring Christs death passion is an enemy opposite to the real coniunction of his body vvhich Christ him self appointed for that special end amonges other that it might streÌ„ghthen our faith spiritual maÌ„ducation both in the sacrament out of the sacrament and make vs perpetually more mindful of his death passion Vnto vvhich mindfulnes careful meditatioÌ„ we are a thousaÌ„d times more stirred by one thought vvhen vve conceive the same his most pretious body here truly and really present and though glorious eternal invisible and indivisible in it â—ell yet visible divided and broken in the sacrament for our benefite and nurriture vve are I say more stirred to remembrance of Christs death and passion by one such cogitation then by al the bread broken and al the â—â—nkardes of wine that are in a vvhole yere filled out and empâ—ied by the bretherne and sisterne in al the suppers communions of Scotland and England ¶ Before M. B. come to extol his spiritual manduâ—â—tion by â—aith he frameth an obiection as made by the Catholikes and by answering the same maketh way as it vvere and entrance to that matter His obiection is this If say they Christs flesh blud be not received but by faith in the spirite then we receive him but by an imaginatioÌ„ by a conceit and fantasie This is the obiection as he frameth it vvhich albeit it be none of ours if it be taken generally as though al manducation of Christ out of the sacrament vvere imaginarie or fantastical which is wicked to speake or think yet being applied to the Protestants receiving by their â—aith it is good and for such I acknowlege it For their receiving by their â—aith is mere imaginarie and fantastical to speake the best And let vs see how M. B. can answere this obiection So saith he they count faith an imagination of the mind a fantasie and opinion But if they had tasted and felt in their sowles what â—aith bringes with it alas they would not cal that spiritual iewel only iewel of the sowle an imagination That we account faith an imagination or fansie is â—alse though one of the founders of your faith that is Zuinglius and his Tigurine church cal it so Howbeit we cal it not so nor thinke of it so but esteeme it as a verie iewel of the sowle though not the only iewel as yow falsely terme it For that besides the cardinal vertues which also an iewels of the sowle and a number of graces of the hoâ— ghost reckened vp by the Apostle every man that haâ—â— a litle skil in his Christian Catechisme knoweth that among the 3. Theological vertues hope is a iewel of the sowle as wel as faith and charitie a iewel of the sowle more pretious and better then â—aith as the Apostle expressely teacheth â— Cor. 13. 13. and by the one and the other is engendred in good Christian Catholike men a great confidence ioy and consolation of mind and by the one and the other they feele in their harts the holy ghost making them to crye Abba pater they hope confidently by the testimonie of that spirite that
more be in the sacramental bread and vvine of the English and Scottish Communion And yet as I suppose nether the English not the Scottish ministers thinke it necessarie that vvhen they minister the communion there be present in the congregation reaping and thresshing grinding and baking and so forth nether yet that in their cup being made of vvine or ale there be many ale cornes or many grapes or in the bread many wheat cornes to signifie the vnitie of the lord with the congregation as also the vnitie of the bretherne and sisterne one vvith an other in faith and love but it is counted sufficient that to the matter of the sacrament these things vvere requisite before it could be made bread or vvine If he thus thinke and answere as he must of necessitie then he answereth him self that it suffiseth this sacrament in the Catholike church to be made of bread and vvine vvhich signifie spiritual nurriture though after consecration the substance of nether remayne vvhich yet nurrish even then sufficiently to performe that vvhich his argument requireth Finally this argument is condemned by Iohn Calvin him self and the vvhole consistorie of Geneva For vvhereas this man argueth that vve haue no sacrament because we want a signe if the substance of the bread be chaunged although that notwithstanding vve reteyne al properties qualities effects and operations of bread Calvin vvith his consistory as before is noted holdeth the sacrament to be perfite and absolute though there be no bread at al though there vvant both substance and qualities of bread al shape forme and nature of bread and vvine both internal and external And vvhereas against that opinion or licentious dispensation there vvas obiected belike by some minister of M. B. his conceite this argument vvhich here he opposeth the Consistorie answereth very gravely This analogie or signification of bread made of many graynes and wine of many grapes to declare our mutual coniunction although it be not to be contemned yet nether is it so precisely to be vrged but that it may suffise vs to testifie that coniunction and faith by like signes in general by other meate and drinke If then the Geneva bretherne may have a very perfit sacrament vvithout any kind of bread and vvine â—ther in substance or accident M. B. his reason proceedeth of smal vvit in denying vs a sacrament vvho reteyne the formet al necessarie properties of bread suâ—ficieÌ„t fully to signifie although according to Christs expresse vvord vve beleeve the substance of bread to be changed in to the substance of a more celestial and divine bread vvhich came from heauen Thirdly saith M. B. if there were such a wonderful thing as they speake of in this sacrament there would haue bene plaine mention made of it in the scripture VVhat playner mention can yow require then This is my body the self same which shal be deliuered for yow This is my blud of the new testament the same which shal be shed for the remission of sinnes for the redemption of the world Can M. B. vvith al his study devise vvords more plaine more effectual more significant Fourthly he much troubleth him self to find the veritie of this proposition This bread is my body vvhether it be true before the words spoken or after c. I answere first let him set downe a truth and not a falsitie and after propose his difficultie and then ether it shal be satisfied or vve wil acknowlege his deep and vnanswerable subtilitie But for ought appeareth in our testaments English Latin or Greeke Christ never vsed any such speech Christ never said This bread is my body but as hath bene declared before Christ so vttered his vvords as possibly they can not yeld that proposition Let M. B. marke vvel the words in the Euangelists and conferte them vvith his grammer rules ether in Greeke or Latin and if he can make Hoc to agree vvith panis or Hic vvith vinum then he may chaunce to trouble vs. Otherwise except he his vvil take vpon them to make vs a new Grammar a new Latin and Greeke language vvhich they may better do and vvith more reason then make vs a new faith new sacraments new Theologie as they have done he shal not find in al the testament that â—â—â—â— Christ said This bread is my body This wine is my blud ¶ Fiftly Austin saith lib. 3. de doctrina Christiana cap. 16. To eate Christs flesh and drinke his blud seemeth to commaund a wickednes or mischief Therefore it is a figuratiue speach whereby we are commaunded to communicate with Christs sufferings and with gladnes to locke vp in perpetual memorie that the flesh of our Lord was crucified and wounded for vs. For otherwise as the same Austin makes mention it were more horrible to eate the flesh of Christ really then to murther him to drinke his blud then to shed his blud S. Austins vvords answere them selues and so doth S. Austin in other places and even here the second place answereth the first because it notifieth how far forth this speach is figurative Only this may be added to the first that vvhen S. Austin saith that to eate Christs flesh is to coÌ„municate with Christs sufferings and to locke vp in perpetual memorie that Christs flesh was crucisied and wounded for vs he meaneth no other thing then S. Paule doth and the church also vvhen they vvil al Christians vvhich ether offer the mystical sacrifice or receive it to do it in remembrance of Christs bitter passion vvherein his flesh vvas truly wounded and crucified for vs as here it is not And that S. Austin thus meant and never meant by locking vp Christs death in perpetual memorie to shut out this real sacrifice and sacrament vvhich most directly and perfitly continueth that death and bluddy sacrifice in perpetual memorie let S. Austin him self be iudge in a number af other places vvhereof some heretofore have bene other hereafter shal be cited For this present this one may serue The Iewes saith he in their sacrifices of beasts which they offered after diuers sorts and fashions as was connenient for so great a matter practised a fore signification or representation of that sacrifice which Christ offered on the crosse VVherefore now the Christians also celebrate and keepe the memorie of the same sacrifice past How by vvords only or cogitations or eating bread and drinking vvine as in the Scottish and Geneua English supper No but by a holy oblation and communication or receiving of the same body and blud of Christ Peracti eiusdem sacrificij memoriam celebrant sacrosanctâ— oblatione participatione corporis sanguinis c. This S. Austin thought the best vvay to locke vp Christs sacrifice and death in perpetual memorie And this perpetual memorie of that bluddy sacrifice standeth wel and is best preserved by the churches mystical sacrifice and real presence of
for that his death passion is then called to memorie and thanks are yelded for so great a benefite Thus VVestphalus and much more to this purpose may the learned reader see in the same place Yet one other interpretation Zuinglius geueth of this vvord body vvhich VVestphalus mentioneth not vz. that the body of Christ in the Eucharist signifieth the church His vvords are VVhen as Paule 1. Cor. 10. saith that the bread which we receiue is the coÌ„munication of Christs body here it standeth for the coÌ„munication of the church for that by this meanes euery man approueth him self to the church and ingraffeth him self therein as it were by geuing an othe The same exposition he auoucheth in his Commentarie de vera falsa religione cap. de Eucharistia Thus Zuinglius VVestphalus in the place before noted alleageth one more exposition taken not from Zuinglius but Ioan. a Lasco whom our late king Edward the sixt created Superintendent of the congregation of straungers in London VVhich exposition is so much the more to be regarded because Caluin him self highly esteemeth it vvhereof thus vvriteth VVestphalus Albeit Caluin in his coÌ„mentarie vpon the first epistle to the Corinthians putteth it out of doubt that THIS HOC in Christs supper pointeth the bread yet that notwithstanding here he defen leth the contrarie opiof Ioanne a Lasco who in his booke of the sacraments of the church assureth that it pointeth not the bread but the whole forme and ceremonie the verie external action of the supper This glose of his reuerend brother that HOC doth not demonstrate bread but the external action of the supper Caluin honoreth as an Oracle from heauen VVhere by the vvay VVestphalus geueth vs a good example hovv much vve may esteeme the conference of places of scripture and interpretation there after made by the Zuinglians and Sacramentaries For saith he let this stand for good that the first particle HOC this according to Caluiâ— Ioannes a Lasco signifieth the external action Next vve must by like reason confesse that Est doth stand for Significat vvhich Zuingliê° proueth by a number of textes of scripture as before hath bene shevved and is after likevvise proued by M. B. Thirdly vve may not deny to Occolampadius like grace vvho saith that scripture al Antiquitie expounded the vvord Body corpus by a figure or signe of the body Let vs now in fine conioyne al together and thence wil arise this prodigious proposition Haec formâ— seu actio câ—nae significat figuram corporis Christi This forme ceremonie or action of the supper signifieth a figure of Christs body And if Christs body stand for the Church as the same Zuinglius sometimes affirmeth or his Passion or his Deitie then the sense is This action signifieth a figure signe of the church of Christs passion or Deitie so forth Al vvhich dravveth to this point first that from the sacrament Christs body is quit remoued and no maner of Christs presence least there at al more then in any other common action place or assembly of Christians Next that concerning any vvorke effect vertue or operation vvrought in the elements of bread and vvine by force of Christs vvords there is nothing done at al. Only in the mynd and vnderstanding of the còmunicants if they be vvel instructed somvvhat there may be perhaps For they coÌ„ming to receiue some perchance remember Christ other geue thanks for his death other thinke vpon his Deitie other vpon the church his mystical body and so â—orth ech hath some imagination one or other according as the preacher ether then at that instant warneth them or as euery man by some fore-conceiued opinion directeth him self and so the bread becoÌ„meth to them a symbole a memorie a signe a thankes-geuing c. according as euerie man is affected ¶ For this the discrete reader vvho coveteth to knovv truly the opinion of our aduersaries whereof in a maner al dependeth must diligently note remember that as the auncient Primitiue church bishops thereof which in most plaine and sincere maner confesse the real presence of Christs body and blud in the Sacament attribute that grace operation to the force of Christs vvord so the Zuinglians or Sacramentaries vvho denie that presence ake the contrarie course flatly resolue the vvords of Christ to vvorke nothing but to be as idle and vnprofitable as if they vvere neuer vttered that for any thing added to the supper by them as good it vvere to reade no chapter at al or any chapter of the bible that if ye please of Christs genealogie in the first of S. Matthevv as the 26. vvords of Christs InstitutioÌ„ Concerning the fathers and auncient church their faith is sufficiently knovven by their manifold most plaine confessions For instruction of the simple I vvil recite the sayings of a fevv Iustinus the martyr in his second Apologie for the Christians made to the Romain Emperour Antoninus vvriteth thus As by the word of god our Sauiour Christ Iesus was incarnate and for our saluation toke flesh and blud euen so by the worde of God with prayer we are taught that of vsu il bread wine is made the flesh blud of the same incarnate Christ Iesus S. Ambrose in a long chapiter by many examples proueth this force and povver of Christs vvord to conuerte the elements of bread and vvine in to his body and blud His vvords are Thou wilt say perhaps how is this the body of Christ whereas my eyes teach me the contrarie He ansvvereth How many examples do we bring to proue that not to be in the Sacrament which nature hath framed but that which benediction hath consecrated And after a number of examples taken out of the old Testament wherein the nature of things hath bene altered of Aarons rod turned in to a serpent of the riuers of Aegipt turned in to blud of the red sea diuided and standing stedfast like a wal of the riuer Iordan turned backe to his fountayne of these he inâ—erreth If then the blessing or prayer made by man were able to chaunge nature what shal we say of the Diuine consecration where the very words not of man but of Christ our lord and Sauiour do worke For the Sacrament which thou receiuest is made by the word of Christ And if Elias speach were of such force that it caused fier to come from heauen shal not Christs speach be of suficient force to alter the nature of these elements bread and wine Thou hast read in the works of al the world He spake the word and they were made he commaunded and they were created Then the word of Christ which was able to make somwhat of nothing can it not change that which already is and hath an essence in to that which it is not c. And this self same reason taken from the creation he vseth
vnworthely S. Paule maketh their sinne to be that they make no differeÌ„ce betwene the body blud of our lord other meates therefore are giltie of that body and blud vvhich they so despâ—se M. B. admitteth not that they proceed so far but coâ—deÌ„nâ—th them before hand before they eate vvhich is â—â—â— against S. Paules coÌ„patison vvhich standeth in this that as those men came to other tables to those ecclesiastical feasts of charitie there did eate drinke vvithout any prâ—câ—dent 〈…〉 al of them selves or examination of their consciences so came they and receiued the body and blud of Christ at this divine table not distinguishing this food from that but vvithout any convenient preparation honor regard or separation of one from the other eating and drinking this divine sacrament as they vvould coÌ„mon meates drinkes VVhich words of necessitie implie an eating drinking on both sides or els there is no comparison and consequently no condemnation of the one side vvhich condemnation remayneth resteth in the vvant of reverence regard and distinction made betwene those vulgar tables and this body and blud of our saviour both vvhich they received but alike and vvith like honor and reverence vvherein they sinned and dishonored Christ whose body they discerned not and therefore received it vnworthely And thus the auncient fathers vnderstood this text and out of it concluded the real presence and real receiving of Christs body though to the condemnation of the receivers So for example S. Austin He that vnworthely receiveth our lords sacrament albeit him self be naught yet that which he receiveth is good Corpus enim domini sanguis domini nihilominus erat illis c. For as to good men so was it the body of our lord and the blud of our lord no lesse vnto them of whom the Apostle said he that eateth vnworthely eateth his owne iudgement The same Doctor intending to shew that the evil vse of good things harmeth greatly what shal I speake saith he of the very body and blud of our lord the only sacrifice of our salvation Of which albeit our lord him self say that it geveth life yet doth not his Apostle teach vs even that to be pernicious to them which vse it noâ— wel when he saith who soever shal eate that bread and drinke that chalice not vvine of our lord vnworthely he shal be gilty of our lords body and blud In vvhich place vvhereas â—e nameth it ipsum corpus sanguinem Domini the very body and blud of our Lord and the only sacrifice of our salvation â—e most certainly noteth not bread and vvine but an other thing except bread and vvine be the very body of Christ and the only sacrifice of our redemption So in his epistles he vvriteth that our Lord suffered Iudas that traytour among his innocent disciples to receiue that which thâ— faithful know our raunsom or redemption quod fideles norâ—â—t pretium nostrum In an other place he calleth it sacrificiâ— pretij nostri the sacrifice of our redemption vvhich vvords of sacrifice raunsom price redemption c. quit exclude M. B. his tropical bread and vvine and prove that Iudas vvith the other disciples received the same body which was delivered for vs the same blud which was shed for vs according to the plain text of al the Evangelists This same veritie and exposition of S. Paules vvords is geven by the other auncient and learned fathers Greeke and Latin as namely S. Basil lib. de baptis cap. 3. S. Chrysost in sundry places in 1. Corinth cap. 11. homil 24. hom 27. â—omil â—3 in Matth. hom 45. in Ioan. S. Cyper sermo de coena Hieron in â— cap. Malach. Treophilact S. Ambros and Theodoret. expounding this place of vvhich the later vpon those very words vvhereon M. B. maketh his cavilling he shal be gilty of our lords body and blud vvriteth expressely thus By these words the Apostle signifieth thus much that aâ— the Iewes dishonored Christ shamefully abused him so they also dishonour and shamefully abvse him who receiue his most holy body with their impure handes and take it in to their defiled and vilanous mouth in pollutum incestum â—â— So that M. B. his conclusion or rather straunge paradox that no man can receive Christ vnworthely vvhich out of the sacrament Herodâ— Annas and many other publicanes Iewes Gentiles other did or might have done and in the sacrament many evil Christians continually do is quit opposite to the Apostles scope and discourse in this place vvhich against al drift of the text and sense of the vvords and exposition of auncient fathers he peevishely laboureth to pervert For albeit sometimes some fathers and namely S. Austin in one or two places vvhich Calvin citeth deny to the vvicked rem sacramenti the thing of the sacrament yet thereby he meaneth not Christs true body as S. Austin declareth his owne meaning but the iustifying grace the fruit and commoditie thereof the vertue and sanctification vvhich by Gods ordinaÌ„ce redouÌ„deth thence to al worthy receivers Nether doth it greatly helpe M. B. that he laboureth to approve his saying by the example of wordly princes who wil not suffer their maiestie to be interessed in the smallest thing But if thow disdainfully vse their seale which is but wax and contemne it and stamp it vnder thy secte thow art compted as gilty of his body and blud as if thow put thy hands on him much more if thow so handle the seales of the body and blud of Christ this I say litle helpeth the matter For first the comparison is nothing like For S. Paule speaketh not of stamping vnder feet of such disdainful abuse and contempt but of vnreuerent receiving vvhich differeth much and therefore if M. B. vvould speake to the purpose and applie his talke to the subiect here handled he should take such examples for the one side vvherein is like coniunction of things signified vvith the signe as he â—â—ineth to be in his Geneva signe or supper and for the other side vvhere men shew such vnteverence towards them as is here likewise presupposed Christ saith he and so say the Protestants of his sect is ioyned vvith the bread as as he is vvith a vvorde spoken as he is with a sermon as he is vvith an image as a king is represented in his picture in his seale in a peece of vvax Suppose then that some man stamp not vnder foote the Testament in despite and disdayne of Christ for so S. Paule speaketh not nor meaneth but that he reade some chapter of the Testament not discerning it from a chapter of S. Hierom or S. Austin is he gilty of our lords body If he heare a sermon preached and perhaps sleepe at the sermon time so receive not Christ inteâ—nally as by the vvord he is offered no lesse then in the Supper is he gilty of the body of the